Cont: 2020 Presidential Election part 3

[turingtest]

Trump's denial of his loss was a foregone conclusion. I am, however, somewhat surprised at some of the Republican "leaders" going along with it, like McConnell and Graham. I keep wondering if Trump's buddy Vlad has provided some kompromat on them.

I've heard things about Graham and that possibility, but I don't think it's at all necessary for McConnell. He strikes me as the epitome of the "career politician" (the type that, ironically, the rabid rightwingers are currently pretending they find so distasteful in government); he's a technician who may have, when he was first starting out, actually had some ideological convictions that were more in line with GOP professions, but now has only winning for his party by any means necessary as his lone conviction. For him, this mess is just another tactic in a battle that isn't really even about anything except the tactics- it's a game to him, he's long since divorced himself from any consideration of how he plays it may affect lesser people in the real world.

And the fact that he's in solid-red Kentucky means he's immune from any blowback from backing Trump that could affect lesser lights like Susan Collins. I suggested this a while ago, but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that McConnell actually advised Collins to vote against considering, then confirming, Barrett for the SC. He didn't need her vote for either win, and she needed to withhold them to keep her Senate seat in Maine, which was important for McConnell, to keep the GOP majority there.

 

[quadraginta]

Jenna Ellis. Senior Legal Adviser to Team Trump and Counsel to Donald Trump tweeted

@JennaEllisEsq
If Joe Biden is really confident he won legally and legitimately, why is he so afraid of proving it?

Because the burden of proof is not on him, dummy.

Hans

Aside from being a candidate he doesn't have anything all to do with the process. The states manage the elections, count the results, review any issues with their performance. and courts deal with the legal challenges.

He's just a bystander after election day. How could he even have anything to prove?

 

[quadraginta]

(bolding mine)
Not so sure about the bolded part, frankly.

Not least because as long as there is a GOP Senate run by McConnell they won't let Biden get anything done, and then Trump (or whoever they put forward in 2024) will blather endlessly about him not getting anything done.

 

[Babbylonian]

What's in it for them ?

McConnell and Graham have a vested interest in keeping Trump's base happy and nothing to lose from continuing to support him.

Yep. The bottom line is that Trumpers completely own the Republican party until the election that proves they don't care anymore.

They're all deplorable and they love it.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

correct, because McConnell will smother him with a pillow if he tries to get nominated again.

McConnell is in on the gravy train, don't kid yourself.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Trump tweets

Heartwarming to see all of the tremendous support out there, especially the organic Rallies that are springing up all over the Country, including a big one on Saturday in D.C. I may even try to stop by and say hello. This Election was Rigged, from Dominion all the way up & down!

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I can't imagine how a senior legal advisor could be so incompetent as to think that question was even worth framing.

Dave

Because she's Tweeting Donald, no one else.

 

[Emily's Cat]

(bolding mine)
Not so sure about the bolded part, frankly.

Waaaaaaay too old at that point, if nothing else.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Pretty much every Republican who is willing to speak on the record would refute the highlighted part because:

• It's only the #FakeNews who have called it, Arizona haven't announced the official results
• The gap in Arizona is very narrow
• President Trump is gaining hand over fist and will soon overtake Joe Binden
• Even if he doesn't there is wide-scale voter fraud which has artificially inflated Biden's count - once this is identified and corrected, Donald Trump will win Arizona

Lot's of Republicans have spoken on the record against this farce.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The need was purely political, not least because the Republican Secretary of State is facing calls for his resignation - presumably because President Trump has lost the state and the Senatorial races are going to a run-off. ...

This^

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Trump Tweets
For years the Dems have been preaching how unsafe and rigged our elections have been. Now they are saying what a wonderful job the Trump Administration did in making 2020 the most secure election ever. Actually this is true, except for what the Democrats did. Rigged Election!

 

[turingtest]

Trump tweets

Heartwarming to see all of the tremendous support out there, especially the organic Rallies that are springing up all over the Country, including a big one on Saturday in D.C. I may even try to stop by and say hello. This Election was Rigged, from Dominion all the way up & down!

If I were a betting man, I'd bet that Trump, if pressed, would be completely unable to explain the issues involved with that- it's another buzz-word, like "ObamaGate," and we know how that went (MSNBC article)-

"'Obamagate.' It's been going on for a long time. It's been going on from before I even got elected. And it's a disgrace that it happened. And if you look at what's gone on, and if you look at, now, all of this information that's being released -- and from what I understand, that's only the beginning -- some terrible things happened, and it should never be allowed to happen in our country again. And you'll be seeing what's going on over the next -- over the coming weeks."

I wish someone on his staff would mention Benford's Law to him- it would be priceless to see him expound on that.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Variance. It's usually safe to assume that more accurate method would have less variance (not a requirement of course).

I believe this is not correct. A more precise method will have less variance, but precision doesn't imply accuracy.

Using a machine process, if the machinery is precise, it will produce the same outcome with extremely low variance in each repeated run. If that process has an inherent error or flaw, that flaw will be repeated in each run as well. So even though it would have low variance of outcomes, it wouldn't necessarily be more accurate.

A hand recount opens the opportunity for human error (and malfeasance), but there are methods for controlling that as well. A simple mitigation is to have each batch of ballots counted independently by two people. If their counts match, then they are considered accurate. If they differ, then the batch is recounted by a different pair of people.

It's actually more efficient than it sounds. Still less efficient than a machine count... but it's often pretty easy to add more bodies.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It's not complex maths though it's just basic addition.

Yes there will errors in a hand count, there will also be errors in a machine count.

People have this weird disconnect where they attach much more weight to results when they come from a computer, or a counting machine.

In reality there are multiple points at which humans have to interact with the machine to count the ballots.

There could be programming errors, user input errors, etc so all in all I don't see how a hand count is any more or less reliable than a machine count.

It's not a "disconnect" and it's a straw man to apply what I said to any situation other than simply counting ballots.

 

[Meadmaker]

It seems to me that Trump's tweets are getting a bit softer. I think even he sees the handwriting on the wall.


He'll never admit it, though.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Trump's denial of his loss was a foregone conclusion. I am, however, somewhat surprised at some of the Republican "leaders" going along with it, like McConnell and Graham. I keep wondering if Trump's buddy Vlad has provided some kompromat on them.

More than likely they don't want the wrath of Trump ruining the Senate runoff in GA.

 

[TragicMonkey]

If I were a betting man, I'd bet that Trump, if pressed, would be completely unable to explain

"anything". I can't think of a single topic, in the whole of human knowlege or experience, that I would bet Trump could muster even a partial explanation of. Perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps he's a secret expert in clockmaking, or has a masterful knowledge of choux pastry, or can tell us what the word for "ketchup" is in ninety different languages. But I doubt it.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It seems to me that Trump's tweets are getting a bit softer. I think even he sees the handwriting on the wall.


He'll never admit it, though.

Reported on NPR: supposedly Heraldo Rivera talked to Trump on the phone and Trump admitted he knew he lost but would wait for the official certification.

More baby steps.

 

[dudalb]

More than likely they don't want the wrath of Trump ruining the Senate runoff in GA.

Most poitical experts say that is behind the GOP comgress critters humoring of Trump.

 

[bonzombiekitty]

CNN, NBC now called Georgia for Biden