Do they not put the party they're representing next to the name of the candidate? Surely you should know if you're voting the democratic or republican candidate versus an independent one?
2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Yes that is a very good question!
You can view it either way; the polls were miles off in prediction terms, was this some sort of pre-coup plot or just hopeless polling systems? Some (unknown scale at present time)ballot irregularities seemingly did occur, as they probably did in previous elections, but were they pre-planned, or just 'c**k-ups? It appears there was an extraordinary increase in mailed-in votes in some areas (even though that's countered by claims about pandemic effect etc.).Trump was flagging up 'his fear of fraud' well before voting day, was he just preparing the ground so to speak? Both sides have been calling for the counting of every vote, but only one side is also saying but don't count illegal votes! One side implying there is no illegal voting...virtually at all and in any case it would not effect the result; the other sides implying there is a lot of illegal voting, with enough of it to change the outcome of the contest.
Both sides have obviously managed to 'get out their vote' in exceptional numbers, as both candidates breaking records, is this indicative of some sort of coup, or just a reaction to better organization?
If there were two coup's in existence, only Biden's seems to be working as of now!
Last edited:
Look at the name of the Twitter account
You shouldn’t be allowed on the internet unsupervised.
You've sampled that I take it!
Batshit.
Its ok I have my carer's permission!
2 coups 1 Maticmaker
That is one of the most batshit crazy posts I have seen in the 20.years of being on the Caf
Democrats were so Machiavellian with the coup/fraud, they made sure they lost a bunch of House seats, kaputz nearly every chance of taking the Senate, and just manipulated enough votes to still be within the recount margin in 4 states, all Republican run, to take Trump out of office.
The ability to formulate some sentences clearly doesn’t require the use of any critical thinking whatsoever.
The ability to formulate some sentences clearly doesn’t require the use of any critical thinking whatsoever.
Ah, he changed the name after I posted it.Look at the name of the Twitter account
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I heard this in response recently:
“If you cheat on a test, you make sure to get a couple wrong so it isn’t suspicious”
— Dude, this is cheating and getting a C-
Oh please, Fox turning on Trump would be glorious. But I don't think he will start shitting on them.
He couldn’t get sufficient advertisers to back such an effort.
There is so much wrong with this post I hardly know where to start. But let's take this as just one example: "only one side is also saying ... don't count illegal votes"
Which Democrat has been saying that illegal votes should be counted? Answer: none.
Yea yea!Ah, he changed the name after I posted it.
It’s just a power play, he is just making sure they continues to be in thrall to him as he spends the next 4 years doing rallies in preparation for 2024.
Despite all the blusters, all he has done over the last 2 decades is slapping him name on shite for profit. He has neither the capital, expertise or even attention span to compete against a market first mover like Fox.
He has a solid base, even if he first starts on twitch / YT he will quickly gain momentum. Question is, will those platforms allow it, considering what diarhea will come out of it.
Indeed. Commentators on the right keep saying "all legal votes should be counted, all illegal votes should not", like this is some kind of knock-down argument against Biden.
As far as I can tell, the only people who are actually against that position are Trump and his cronies, who have been asking for the states to stop counting LEGAL votes.
Appreciate this was from yesterday, which was an age ago in this thread, but just interested where you're seeing strong evidence of a 'general movement left'? The narrow Dem victory alone would sure be very flaky evidence of this.
Thanks for the post, very interesting to read about how it is beyond "Orbán is becoming a de facto autocrat". On question that comes to mind: I'm kind of a believer in the idea that its not the people's love for democracy that keeps a democracy and a republic standing. More often it is that there are 2 or more competing elites that find in a democracy a state of equilibrium that is acceptable to all, instead of recurrently engaging in internal conflict. Are there no other elites in Hungary that are historically powerful enough to push back, and are not backers of Fidesz?
Just so you know, there has historically been almost no evidence of voter fraud in US elections. See this from 2016 for example: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ts-cast-in-the-2016-election-were-fraudulent/
It's also the case in the UK: https://www.electoralcommission.org...nd-research/our-research/electoral-fraud-data
Bear in mind that in both those elections I've linked to there, people linked to the party who won the election were the ones trying to claim voter fraud which doesn't really make sense, unless they have an ulterior motive.
That ulterior motive is almost always bringing in additional voter suppression techniques such as increasing ID requirements to vote, which they think will hurt the opposition more than them in the following elections.
That would require a book to answer properly but in short, no. One of Orbán's stated goal was to create a "national elite" - it's a nice euphemism for creating an elite that is loyal to him. The country's richest man is his childhood friend, who at one point was a near-bankrupt gas-fitter. The country's second richest man, chairman of Hungary's oldest bank which was privatised in the 1990s, is a very crafty person who carefully maintained connections with all sides of the political scene throughout the last 30 years.
I could dive deeper into it, talking about how after 40 years in the Warsaw Pact the country had no traditional elite anymore and how a hurried and opaque privatisation process created quite a mess. Also, it's a small country, meaning that the central government has huge power and influence - for instance, advertising revenue from state-owned enterprises can be make-or-break for media outlets because the market itself is small.
Teflon Don vs Murdoch is the battle where no one else loses.
How long can Trump keep going to court with these baseless claims? Every single fraud claim has been rejected so far, at some point the judges surely must just tell them to feck off and stop wasting their time?
I had not thought about the period of socialist rule and how it affects this matter of the elites, but now that you mention it it makes a lot of sense. Not dismissing also the fact that smaller countries are less likely to see various economic elites because its less likely there are that many outstanding economic activities. But about the socialism, yeah that by definition should knock out the groups I was thinking of that are the historical economic elites.
I think thats the Trump gameplan at the moment - scorch earth the transition with encumbering baseless claims. I doubt he expects any of these lawsuits to bear fruit, they're merely intended to cast doubt over the electoral process and keep his base galvanised. What he plans to do beyond that I don't know.
I always like a good 'Coup' theory, America's full of them!
Really? I thought it well balanced in the statements you could use in terms of 'if you were 'looking for Coups'... from both sides?
Which Democrat has been saying that illegal votes should not be counted? Answer none.
The problem for Democrats is they are behaving like there are no illegal votes, none whatsoever, that there never has been any illegal votes, that illegal votes have never been counted in the history of elections, when clearly there are some votes whose legality can be questioned, both in the present election and past elections. The chances are what 'illegal votes' there are, are probably miniscule in number and would make no difference to the result as predicted, but the Democrats. as they have been doing for four years , when they make such remarks it allows Trump to knock them out of the park!
It is almost inevitable there will be a number of reasons why a small amount of votes will be declared 'illegal'; mistakes in posting, some mislaid, some technical (IT) errors (already admitted) and even be some 'dead voters' ballots may have been received, there are any number of reasons for 'illegal' votes turning up, but in total will probably make no difference. If the Biden camp is so sure there is none of this, or it would be a small or miniscule total of such votes, then why doesn't the President -elect say "OK Donald lets identify these multi-faceted 'illegal' votes, take them out of the reckoning/equation and then see who has come second to me"!
Somehow I relate coup with you as a poster. Were you the one who was going on and on about the impeachment procedures initiated against Trump tantamount to a coup? Or did you say impeachment by itself was a coup? The only coop you need is a chicken coop.
feck sake...
There’s a lot of work involved when it comes to creating YT/Twitch/Talk radio contents. Trump is lazy as feck, he only wants to call in whenever he feels like it and rants and raves to his heart’s content. Being the host, being interactive with the online audience (which isn’t physically present to provide the energy he can play off) requires a whole other set of skills.
Joe Rogan’s election night coverage stream got sth like 700k concurrent viewers, which is already extraordinary for online content, but still only a fraction of the big 3 and local affiliated news channels, and he’s the biggest political content creator atm. Trump will consign himself to a much smaller audience if he chooses to dip into that pool, instead of the 24 hours news network where his every word is played on loops.
This whole legal/illegal votes is just a rhetoric device advanced by the republicans. In no election before have people spoken in these terms. All there are in elections are valid votes, and invalid votes. Votes have already likely been declared invalid during the count for a number of reasons. Bad signature, no signature, ballot not properly filled, so on and so forth. There has not in the history of the last decades ever been any reports of a substantial number of votes that should have been declared invalid and not counted, having been declared valid and counted.
From a practical point of view, the counting is already a big burden on the states, both financially and in terms of time. There is a month to get this all certified per the law. GA will already have a recount because state laws determine it based on how close the voting was. There is no legal reason to initiate a recount in some 4 other states, unless the Trump campaign ponies up the money to pay for it in the places he can. Furthermore, a recount will not really serve to prove whether there is a mass of invalid votes being counted. It will mainly solve if there are machine errors that might have led a few votes here and there to be counted for a candidate when maybe they were initially called as blank.
There is no legal obligation for anyone to go digging to substantiate claims that are made without any evidence. That which is claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
But that's exactly what Democrats are saying: "show some actual evidence!" So far, Trump's team has been wholly unsuccessful at that, and their lawsuits keep getting tossed out of courts, one after another.
He will hire a lot of cultists to prepare stuff for him and pay them close to nothing. Even if there is no structure to his shows and is basically non stop ranting , it will still milk his base .
Frustrating the transition is probably an end-goal in itself in preparation for 2024. It's been well-documented that Trump's administration has been chaotic with a variety of key roles left unfilled and many aspects of governance set aside or neglected as a consequence. Biden's admin was likely already facing an unprecedented clean-up job just to get back on an even-keel: if Trump's administration actively works to frustrate the incoming Executive on top of that, it will make both Biden's job as President (and consequently, the Democrats job of winning the next election) even more difficult.
And he can milk his base better if he continues what he’s doing now, calling into Fox and Friends every morning and doing rallies every other week. Hassle free, proven to work and cost him nothing, his MO.
This ‘Trump goes to war with Fox’ or ‘Trump runs as third party’ are just pure liberal fantasy. Murdoch and the Republican establishment will alway cave in the end, because their bottom line depends on the rubes, and Trump owns the rubes.
That's why I said that I don't believe he will break with Fox. But nothing stops him from calling into F&F every morning, and have an online presence at the same time, which is not directly competing with them.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Guilty until proven innocent.
Why were the Trump supporters who turned up at the counting station to chant "count the votes" not chanting "only count the legal votes, disregard the illegal votes"? Why don't they want the illegal votes to be stopped?
The default position should be that votes are legally cast, otherwise you might as well scrap the system.
- Status