• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: 2020 Presidential Election part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Captain_Swoop said:
Tweets flagged by Twitter:
This claim about election fraud is disputed


Trump Tweets

The Fake Pollsters at @ABC/@washingtonpost produced a possibly illegal suppression Poll just before the Election showing me down 17 points in Wisconsin when, in fact, on Election Day, the race was even - & we are now preparing to win the state. Many such “deplorable” instances!

A guy named Al Schmidt, a Philadelphia Commissioner and so-called Republican (RINO), is being used big time by the Fake News Media to explain how honest things were with respect to the Election in Philadelphia. He refuses to look at a mountain of corruption & dishonesty. We win!
Click to expand...

That lousy Al Schmidt. smh.
 
Trump wins Alaska. From AP:

President Donald Trump has won the state of Alaska.

The Republican nominee was awarded the state’s three electoral votes, pushing his Electoral College tally to 217.

His Democratic opponent, Joe Biden, was declared the winner of the presidential election on Nov. 7 after flipping Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. Trump won those states in 2016.

Biden has 290 electoral votes.
Click to expand...
 
slyjoe said:
From Politico:


My main point is a full hand recount is less accurate than a machine recount.
Click to expand...

I agree.

A hand recount means a lot more people involved, and a lot more locations (even if it means more tables in a gym). Then you have to combine all those counts.

It would be more efficient and less diffuse to run a stack of 100 000 through a machine in a couple of hours than to have them split out into 20 stacks of 5 000
 
Emily's Cat said:
It's already the way, and has been for a while. The (probably needless) investigation would put to rest some of the concerns, and potentially strengthen our election system, because it does have loopholes. Even if the impact of those loopholes is small, they do exist, and thus will always be a source of conflict.

The tactics are different by party, but most of the strategies are the same. For the Republicans right now, it's voter fraud (which they've used before as well). In 2016, it was the Democrats crying that Russians hacked the voter booths. The Obama Birthers got replaced by the Pee Tapers. This isn't new. But Trump sure does make it blatant.
Click to expand...

Oh? Name a single prominent Democrat who gave any time to the pee tape allegations.

Investigating Russian influence and Trump's willingness to accept it is not even close to Birtherism.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Georgia secretary of state announces hand recount of presidential race

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger announced Wednesday his state will conduct a manual hand recount of all ballots cast in the presidential race in the state, as he faces growing pressure from fellow Georgia Republicans over unsubstantiated accusations of voting irregularities and mismanagement of the state's elections.

"This will help build confidence. It will be an audit, a recount and a recanvass all at once," Raffensperger said at a press conference. "It will be a heavy lift."

He said the presidential contest will undergo a risk-limiting audit, which requires a full by-hand recount in each of Georgia's 159 counties.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/georgia-election-hand-recount-audit-presidential-race/
Click to expand...

If it's 'an audit', it is likely to be based on random samples rather than all six million or so.
 
Emily's Cat said:
:rolleyes: And I'm sure that if Trump had won the EC vote, all of the democrats in the country would have just gone quietly without protests of any sort, right?

Different actors, same play.

But that's okay, I'm well aware of your deep partisanship.
Click to expand...

There may well have been large protests had Trump won. I don't believe Democratic leadership would claim the election was utterly fraudulent. That's a big difference that you can't pretend not to notice.
 
Elagabalus said:
That lousy Al Schmidt. smh.
Click to expand...

There was a twitter thread about this guy.

You talk about REAL republican, this is the guy. Working hard to fight the democratic machine in Philadelphia, eventually got himself elected.

If this is not what the Republicans want working for them, then that is their problem.
 
Emily's Cat said:
The tactics are different by party, but most of the strategies are the same. For the Republicans right now, it's voter fraud (which they've used before as well). In 2016, it was the Democrats crying that Russians hacked the voter booths. The Obama Birthers got replaced by the Pee Tapers. This isn't new. But Trump sure does make it blatant.
Click to expand...

No. In 2016 Democrats were complaining about Russian interference, especially with regard to social media campaigns, wikileaks, and the like. And those complaints were found to be valid by the Republican led Senate panel that investigated
 
slyjoe said:
Georgia hand recount is a poor approach. These things should be based on evidence. And assuming a hand recount is better than a machine recount is incorrect.

ETA: I seem to remember someone having a signature to the effect "A man with a single watch knows what time it is, while a man with two watches is never sure."
Click to expand...

To be fair, a man with one watch is confident about the time, while a man with two watches is not. Not quite the same thing.
 
wareyin said:
No. In 2016 Democrats were complaining about Russian interference, especially with regard to social media campaigns, wikileaks, and the like. And those complaints were found to be valid by the Republican led Senate panel that investigated
Click to expand...

To be fair, I did hear a lot of people crying about Russians hacking voter booths. However, no elected officials that I am aware of ever said that. It was just yammering on social media and the like.
 
wareyin said:
No. In 2016 Democrats were complaining about Russian interference, especially with regard to social media campaigns, wikileaks, and the like. And those complaints were found to be valid by the Republican led Senate panel that investigated
Click to expand...

I do think that Emily's Cat seems to be quite careful in parsing claims about Trump but quite footloose when describing the actions of Democrats. It does not result in a fair comparison and weakens her claim that both sides are driven by partisanship to similar degree.
 
Paul2 said:
In every case, it will come down to the Supreme Court, and Roberts and Gorsuch in particular, I think. If state legislatures try to install their hand-picked electors, the Dems will file suit and it will go to SCOTUS. Any Trump lawsuit will wind up at SCOTUS.
Click to expand...

While my stomach knots over the election clearly are not over as I thought they would be, which states are these that you think the legislators are interested in installing unfaithful electors?

Because I've only heard from one (can't remember which one) and they insisted they are not about to overturn the vote in their states.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom