Trump Attacks Legitimate Vote-Counting Efforts and Claims Fraud Without Basis (cnn.com) 691
President Trump attacked legitimate vote-counting efforts in remarks from the White House early Wednesday, suggesting attempts to tally all ballots amounted to disenfranchising his supporters, CNN reports. From the report: "Millions and millions of people voted for us," Trump said in the East Room. "A very sad group of people is trying to disenfranchise that group of people." His remarks were laced with misleading statements and outright falsehoods and amounted to an assault on the Democratic process. He insisted that states where vote tallies currently show him leading should be called in his favor, despite significant outstanding votes yet to be counted. He said he was preparing to declare victory earlier in the evening. "We were getting ready for a big celebration. We were winning everything. And all of a sudden it was just called off," he said. Trump baselessly claimed a fraud was being committed. "This is a fraud on the American public. This is an embarrassment to our country," Trump claimed. "Frankly we did win this election," he said, despite millions of votes still outstanding. Saying he would go to the US Supreme Court, Trump said he wanted "all voting to stop." Further reading:
Biden urges patience as Trump threatens court action (The New York Times);
Trump falsely and prematurely claims election victory (Axios);
Trump baselessly claims 'fraud' amid nail-biter results (The Guardian);
Trump falsely declares victory: 'We already have won' (ABC News);
Trump tries to claim victory; Biden says votes still being tallied (NPR);
and No clear winner in presidential race as vote counting continues, election hangs in balance. (Fox News)
Biden urges patience as Trump threatens court action (The New York Times);
Trump falsely and prematurely claims election victory (Axios);
Trump baselessly claims 'fraud' amid nail-biter results (The Guardian);
Trump falsely declares victory: 'We already have won' (ABC News);
Trump tries to claim victory; Biden says votes still being tallied (NPR);
and No clear winner in presidential race as vote counting continues, election hangs in balance. (Fox News)
This is going to be entertaining (Score:4, Insightful)
Trump Attacks Legitimate Vote-Counting Efforts and Claims Fraud Without Basis
Thank you for the very accurate headline, /. But I'm sure it'll offend many people who are not used to the truth being stated so bluntly.
It'll be interesting to hear what excuses they come up with to try and discredit the story.
Re:This is going to be entertaining (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
He was just kidding?
One of the classics!
Re:This is going to be entertaining (Score:5, Funny)
He was just kidding?
I WAS NOT KIDDING! - Trump
He was just joking. - Whitehouse Press Secretary
NO I WASN'T! #fired - Trump
I think we need to try and truly understand the meaning behind the words of Trump. When he said he was not kidding what he actually meant was... - Fox News
Re:Or... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ahh, Trumpsplaining!
If he meant that, he could have said that. But of course he didn't.
Also, many / most of the uncounted ballots were sent in prior to Tuesday, and were already received. Some states do not permit counting of those ballots to occur before election day.
Re:Or... (Score:4, Interesting)
One of the states that doesn't start counting until election day is Pennsylvania, the swingiest of swing states.
If both Michigan and Wisconsin go to Trump (as they are currently leaning), Pennsylvania will decide the election and it may be more than a week before the result is known.
The polls predicted a cakewalk for Biden. It isn't playing out that way.
Re:Or... (Score:4, Insightful)
The polls predicted a cakewalk for Biden. It isn't playing out that way.
As near as I can tell, it's going mostly as predicted. Trump was expected [fivethirtyeight.com] to have a 16 point lead in Pennsylvania on election night, which would shift by 21 points to a 5 point Biden win after all votes were counted. Trump actually had a 13 point lead on election night, which is now down to 10 points the morning after.
I don't know whether it's similar for all states, this is a very quirky election, but Biden is still a clear favorite. Trump did win Florida though, in which Biden was somewhat favored. It's the senate which is most worrisome.
Re:The vote counting ain't done... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, Australia, where we also have our election on Saturdays (Tuesday is dumb), everyone uses pencil and paper (machines are a dumb idea), votes counting is witnessed by scrutineers, and voting only ever takes 5 minutes as there are plenty of polling places.
Re:The vote counting ain't done... (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, Australia, where we also have our election on Saturdays (Tuesday is dumb), everyone uses pencil and paper (machines are a dumb idea), votes counting is witnessed by scrutineers, and voting only ever takes 5 minutes as there are plenty of polling places.
Tuesday wasn't dumb when the country was run by horse and buggy and most people were Christian farmers who observed the sabbath and attended church service on Sunday, harvested crops on Monday, could go to town to vote on Tuesday, and stay in town with their product for the market day on Wednesday.
Machines aren't a dumb idea, but a paper trail should be a requirement. Unfortunately my state does not do this [angry grunting] but c'est la vie. I wish we could say there are plenty of polling places, but even under normal circumstances that's not true. With Covid times going on, it's doubly not true.
PS, I thank your nation for introducing the standardized, secret ballot to national elections. I cannot imagine how farcical "democracy" would be without it.
Re: (Score:3)
Counting votes by computers is an extremely bad idea because you'll never be even 95% sure that nobody has been meddling with the results, either on the machine itself or during communication between systems.
We know this for a fact because computer hacks, network intrusions, data fraud, etc happens on a daily basis all around the world on dozens if not hundreds of different platforms, operating systems and even at the firmware level. For example, if you start with an Intel or AMD CPU you're already screwed
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Machines aren't a dumb idea,
Honestly, I think they are, as they represent a huge single point of failure. I think elections are more likely to be massively influenced by shitty code, bugs and poor development practices rather than fraud but no one will notice until one state comes in for a green party candidate winning in a 255.99988237% landslide or something.
With human counters and human observers, it requires a vast effort to influence the process because humans don't scale well and you have to influence
Re:The vote counting ain't done... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, Australia, where we also have our election on Saturdays (
The best thing here is compulsory voting, which I thought was annoying until I saw how the US system works.
With compulsory voting, politicians compete for the middle ground, to win the undecided voters.
But in the US, politicians compete to be the most extreme, to win the primaries, and to scare their base into voting, because the "other guy" will be a disaster.
Everybody becomes a communist or a racist. Fear has become the prime motivational tool.
Re:The vote counting ain't done... (Score:5, Informative)
What is the penalty in you country for people who violate the compulsory voting?
In Australia there is a $20 fee (US$14) if you are unable to make up a good excuse for not voting.
But voting is so easy, on the day or by mail.
Technically, you do not actually have to vote. You can send an empty envelope, or just get your name crossed off at the polling place.
Actual voting rate is about 92%.
It is definitely worth the minor inconvenience of a visit to the local primary school. There is often a cake stall and sausage sizzle run by the parents.
If there is a line, just come back later. No need to wait more than a few minutes usually.
Re: (Score:3)
How can you write all that without mentioning the democracy sausage!
Elections are where where Australians go for a snag (a snack sausage made of mystery meat, we don't know what's in it and we don't want to).
Re:Or... (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course, you have sources that prove that the States are counting non-postmarked ballots?
Re:Or... (Score:5, Informative)
That's allowed in some states:
https://www.ncsl.org/research/... [ncsl.org]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Indeed it is. For ballots already received by Election Day. Nothing in there about late ballots being counted improperly, which was what OP was implying.
Re: (Score:3)
Look at Nevada and New Jersey in the link:
Ballots without postmarks will be accepted up to (3,2) days after Election Day.
It's also the subject of litigation in some states.
Re:Or... (Score:4, Insightful)
Pennsylvania is also in that bucket: "Under the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling that allows the three-day extension, ballots with no postmark or an illegible postmark are presumed to have been postmarked by the Election Day deadline, unless there is evidence the ballot was mailed after the deadline," the [Secretary of State's] spokesperson said.
Combined with court rulings that election judges can't really challenge signatures, several of the important security measures for mail-in ballots are undermined. Also, as far as I can tell, state law says that all absentee ballots "must be received by the appropriate county election board not later than the close of the polls" -- rather than three days later.
Re:Or... (Score:5, Informative)
Heck of a spin. How exactly is insisting the rules stay as they've always been so as not to stop a very large (millions!) number of legitimate voters from being disenfranchised just because they might tillt away from the current president "undemocratic".
Remember THIS IS ALWAYS HOW IT WORKS. And its *NOT* about letting people vote after, its about dealing with the fact the postoffice doesnt get them all in time.
How the heck do you think military votes work? Because if your desire to do a pretty radical rule change from the usual way its always worked was a thing, deployed servicemen would lose their votes.
Surely cancelling peoples votes is undemocratic.
Re:Or... (Score:5, Insightful)
You assume the Supreme court would come to a ruling based on law rather than politics. I surely hope you're right, but I'm not sure that's a safe assumption considering how politicized things have become, and the fact that there's a good argument to be made that Trump has seemingly selected 1/3rd of judges for personal loyalty to himself rather than any particular qualifications.
Re: (Score:3)
Good points, but the nice thing about the SC is that "because I like this guy" is not a valid opinion. Every opinion must have a legal backing
Yes, but it can be bullshit. It's not like bullshit will get them kicked out of The Supremes.
I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Insightful)
...and i've heard heads of state make similar statements in the past. It never ends well.
This shit is genuinely scary.
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:4, Interesting)
It kind of makes me wonder what Biden could have said to get more people to vote for him.
"I hereby resign and hand the position over to a younger, more dynamic candidate" would have done it. I mean, if fricken Biden is the best candidate the Democrats can put forward then they almost deserve to lose to Trump.
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe Democrats should pick celebrities as leaders, it works well for the Republicans and many Americans will vote for the person because of they way they feel about them regardless of past track or policy.
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Insightful)
if fricken Biden is the best candidate the Democrats can put forward then they almost deserve to lose to Trump.
True. But this would have been easier if a lot of people in America did not think that Socialists are going to sneak into their houses and steal their children. Biden was probably chosen because he clearly wasn't a socialist (by whatever passes for that definition).
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Informative)
Thing is even Bernie Sanders is not a socialist by any definition that you could come up with that would be recognized by anyone in Europe as a legitimate definition.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In fairness I think this was a suggestion for what he should have done prior to the election, not during or after.
Truth is, he doesn't need to resign. He's going to be removed anyway. President Harris by April.
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Interesting)
Obama's failed attempt at socialisation (single-payer healthcare
We're so afraid of the slippery slope of socialism taking over, but forget that we have full control over what socialist programs we adopt or don't adopt. And we are already have a major socialist program that everyone is ok with, especially the right-wingers: the military.
The slippery slope to socialism isn't slippery at all, we get to pick and choose what programs we want or don't want. And adopting one doesn't mean we need to keep adopting more and more.
Being afraid that the slope to socialism is slippery is basically admitting that the socialist programs will be better than what we have or else how could adopting any socialist programs lead to complete socialism?
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Informative)
Obama didn't attempt single-payer health care. The ACA is not at all single-payer, nor was it intended to be. It was cribbed from a Republican health care plan formerly championed by Mitt Romney, which is why some call it "Romneycare". It's not single-payer at all in that it writes the insurance companies directly into the law.
What we NEED is actual single-payer health care, specifically Medicare expansion. They should move back the starting age for eligibility by several years for every year that passes until we all are covered. And the insurance companies, which operate the "Death Panels" to decide to whom to deny care that the conservatives claimed the government would be running, would be out of the game — and good riddance.
The ACA was a step in the right direction, but only one step, in that it prohibited denying care on the basis of preexisting conditions. It really didn't do anything else right.
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Insightful)
He was going against a candidate that many in his own party don't like, surely he could have said something to get more votes.
While Biden is not super-inspiring, I think we are just wrong about how many people do not like Trump.
Shy Trump voters (who publicly agree that he is horrible but vote for him) must be a thing after all? Trump's numbers appear to be noticeably higher than his approval ratings.
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd like to think it's just people voting for the GOP candidate no matter who they are, although that's not much better.
I see a QAnon believer and a dead guy just got elected for the Republicans, so I assume most people voting for them aren't doing it on the strength of their character.
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Insightful)
While Biden is not super-inspiring, I think we are just wrong about how many people do not like Trump.
No you are not wrong in that. You are wrong in understanding how many people do not like identity politics more that they do not like Trump.
In other words, this was electoral "Go woke, go broke".
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Insightful)
You probably know conservative people and don't know it. Here's how you find one: start a conversation about politics in a group of people. The ones who then leave the conversation or stay quiet and don't make eye contact: that's the conservative. They don't trust a left-leaning person won't villainize them or make them uncomfortable for thinking differently, so they just stay quiet. Heck, I'm a registered independent and I generally vote either way depending on the issue, and I'm even feeling nervous for posting this, but I'm going to step out of my discomfort and try to explain the conservative position (again, not a Trump voter and not even conservative because I don't vote for President; my state is a non-battleground all-or-nothing electoral college).
(side edit: see how I put in a disclaimer? I've had so many attacks for even just explaining the conservative position that I am trying to stave them off, and I'm not even conservative, I just listen to them to try and understand them!)
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:4, Insightful)
Wrong. In the USA [politicalcompass.org], nearly all discussions about politics are right-leaning. For example, Bill Clinton campaigned as a conservative Democrat (did you forget those exist?) promising welfare reform using conservative principles [wikipedia.org]; and Obama, Biden, and Hillary Clinton are also similarly conservative. Sanders is only just left of center, and maybe Jill Stein is further left. I don't know of any "radical" leftist politicians in the USA.
That's in a blue city in a blue state, right?
Re: (Score:3)
I mostly lean left, though I'm registered independent, but I would instantly walk away from anyone attempting to start a political conversation. Especially in this environment. I've seen literally fist fights break out in the parking lot at work over political opinions. I'm not partaking in that garbage.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Here's how you find one: start a conversation about politics in a group of people. The ones who then leave the conversation or stay quiet and don't make eye contact: that's the conservative. They don't trust a left-leaning person won't villainize them or make them uncomfortable for thinking differently, so they just stay quiet.
There are several other options which also fit the data:
* They thy know their opinions are self serving but unconscionable and are unable to justify them.
* They are massively paranoi
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Shy Trump Voters (who publicly agree that he is horrible but vote for him) must be a thing after all?
Yet all the "pollsters" swore up and down that the Shy Trump Voter was a myth and / or they'd been accounted and compensated for in the polls.
The real takeaway -- regardless of the eventual outcome -- is that the current pollsters are either dreadfully incompetent or willfully dishonest. But it's pretty clear at this point that the polls are fucking worthless. Expect more self-justification gymnastics and
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think we are just wrong about how many people do not like Trump.
I don't think so. Elections in America really boil down who do you hate and above all fear the least. I know several Trump supporters. I don't know a single one of them who think he's good and not a single person who likes him. I know people are motivated by selfish and singular reasons. In the past 4 years the number of times I've heard single minded nonsense is incredible:
"I don't like Trump, but the Democrats will take my guns away".
"I'm a democrat and Trump is horrible but if Bernie becomes the candidate then I will vote for Trump because I don't want my taxes being used on people who made poor choices about which uni degree to get".
"I don't like Trump but at least he's hard on immigration and I got fired 2 years ago and replaced by a H1B".
These stories go on and on. People genuinely hate Trump, but also people genuinely hate / fear someone else even more.
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Insightful)
The key to your question about what Biden could have said to sway voters away from Trump is simple: actually have a position that isn't Democrat party line, but rather thought out. His entire campaign boiled down to "I'm not Trump" and "I'm legacy of Obama". But there was very little to define Biden as Biden; it was just a reflection of others. I watched many of the debates and his campaign rallies and I still don't know what he stands for.
What the Democrats don't get is that they are responsible for Trump; most voters for Trump do not like him. But they know who and what he is: he has defined himself as standing for America and American values as something to be proud of. Despite his very non-presidential posturing and his utter lack of rhetoric (using the term as a political skill), they know he is a bully, but he's a bully standing up to other perceived bullies: European's constantly trying to tell America what to do, China's ever encroaching rise, North Korea being the occasional butthead, Iran, etc. And most important of all to Trump voters, he stands up to the biggest bullies of all (as they see it): Democrats.
If you think about the American population as a normal distribution, the Democrat message has been playing at the edges: poor, minority ethnicities, and how we need to help them come up, that taxes need to be increased on businesses to pay for climate change, etc. It's a populist message but one that targets urban issues, and Obama was the culmination of that message. The problem is, their rhetoric used villainizing tactics: terms like white privilege, reparations even being considered (California put together a commission to investigate whether reparations are a real thing), American Imperialism, etc. I think they did that to play into the anger and frustration those minorities feel to win them over. But the result of that is on that normal distribution; they have focused on the edges by villainizing the middle. Well in the middle of that distribution is the target of their villainizing tactics: the non-minority working class white people. Working class white people have a vision of America: it's about being free to do as you want, that you value your friends, family, and neighbors, and you get by by working hard. Life is often tough adn not fair, but you don't bitch or complain, you work with your town or community, and you'll be ok, because America is a place to be proud of; that's what they believe. Talk to a white blue collar worker in Kentucky or Michigan is struggling to find work or make ends meet while his best buddy is addicted to opioids and his lack of finances leads him and his wife to eat poorly resulting in poor health and obesity and explain to him how America is actually a place with an awful history of imperialism and racism, what white privilege is and how minorities need more help to be equal, and how we need to work with other countries even though our "Allies" barely contribute their fair share to NATO (many military people from the heartlands notice that NATO based are heavily American and have very little European participation) and he'll say "Screw you a-hole, what about our situation?" They see all that message as elitism coming from coastal cities trying to explain to him why it's his fault because his ancestors owned slaves (when he's probably a third generation immigrant or an Irish or scandinavian descendant so he couldn't have owned slaves; most slave owners were Anglo-Saxon or Germanic).
The Democrats have missed something entirely: as a result of the "progressive" message that they're defining as the future of America, they've alienated the heartland of America by telling them that others are going to be lifted
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Interesting)
But they know who and what he is: he has defined himself as standing for America and American values as something to be proud of.
See this is what throws me off every single time. Which American values are we standing for here? Grabbing women by the pussy? Being a dishonest business person who reneges on his obligations? Somebody who thinks the constitution does not apply to him? Someone willing to accept foreign aid in order to obtain his political goals? Because I was raised in a very conservative family who is die hard Republican and I don't remember any of these being taught to me as what American values are. I have, however, spent some time in a third world country with a dictator in charge and these values of Trump seem to align quite well with that dictator's values. And no - I am not trying to say that Trump intends to become a dictator. I am saying that everything he espouses is the exact opposite of what I was raised to believe about my country and the values of its citizens. Clearly I am out of touch with reality or there is something going on here that has nothing to do with values.
Re: I grew up in South America... (Score:5, Insightful)
Can you expand on this part for me?
he has defined himself as standing for America and American values
Yes, that's the party line, but what "American values" does Trump stand for?
When Clinton was getting sexual favors in the white house, every Republican knew what those values meant: not cheating on your wife while in office (Monica Lewinsky), not paying off people with whom you cheated before the election (Jennifer Flowers). When the Bush's were running for president, it meant not intervening in foreign affairs, it was called "compassionate conservativism" . But Trump doesn't represent those values at all. He is almost the polar opposite: a non-Christian 3-timing playboy - how does he represent American values? I suppose if American values are sex, drugs, and money then yeah - he sure does represent those values.
If you went back to 2005 and said to Americans "Imagine that a non-christian rich playboy billionaire is running for president. Which party do you think they would run as?" Nobody would respond "Republican" and back that up with "I bet the evangelicals will love that candidate!" Something has gone terribly wrong.
I grew-up in a conservative Republican household and I watched the news with my parents when Bill Clinton was in office. My mom made it very clear that we Christians do not condone the kind of behavior we saw from him. We talked about the importance of "character." It was a theme in our household and in our church. That's not the same set of values I am seeing from the Republicans today.
(* Yes, he declared he was a Christian the year he ran for office, but I'm not sure anyone seriously believes it)
What many left leaning people do not understand is that a Trump voter is not a Trump supporter; it's in fact a vote of no-confidence in the Democrat message
I could understand that. But the Trump supporters I know are the "I would vote for Trump no matter what he says or does" kind. They are exactly what the memes about Trump supporters make fun of. They ones I know believe Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya, the earth is 6000 years old, global warming isn't real, masks don't work, and Antifa is committing all the violence kinds of people. I can tell you from personal experience that they are real. One of them recently told me that "I have never heard of a Trump supporter being violent." He thinks all violence comes from Antifa. It might restore my hope for this country if I personally encounter a Trump supporter going "Well, I like his economic policy but its a shame he lies so much" type.
Biden's path (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Biden's path (Score:5, Insightful)
The margin is large, but they haven't reported on their mail-in ballots which have a strong Biden bias, and this year it will be especially strong.
Re:Biden's path (Score:4, Insightful)
Which implies 1.2 million to go.
Re: Biden's path (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
It's so close, do you regret not voting now?
If someone didn't want to vote what makes you think they give a crap now?
Re: (Score:3)
On the popular count, Biden has 66.9m votes to Trump's 65.3m. It's so close, do you regret not voting now?
I do regret reading all those polls prior to the election. I voted, but hitting projected popular win isn't worth much.
I was really amused by one of the fivethirtyeight.com podcasts on Ohio being called for Trump. "What happened, it was a close race going in, but it looks like it was called early". I guess it wasn't a close race and the pollsters seriously screwed up?
Re:Biden's path (Score:5, Interesting)
It's so close, do you regret not voting now?
Current projections have the total voter turnout at about 160 million people, the highest turnout in over 100 years. That is over 23 million more people than in 2016. The most shocking thing so far to me is I thought this level of turnout would have been a huge boost to Biden. Conventional wisdom is that Democrat policies are more favored by Americans overall, but Republican policies are favored by those who actually vote consistently. But in this case those extra 23 million voters seem to be close to evenly split.
Although there were signs that not all non-voters are created equal. The political leanings of nonvoters varies widely state to state [fivethirtyeight.com], with non-voters in Pennsyvannia / Florida / Virginia leaning Republican and Georgia / Wisconsin / Michigan leaning Democrat. This was based on polls though, so who knows which of those non-voters actually showed up. Based on results so far, it looks like it was people who fear Socialists will steal our babies at night.
Re: (Score:3)
It's so close, do you regret not voting now?
Current projections have the total voter turnout at about 160 million people, the highest turnout in over 100 years.
And no matter who wins, everyone should be able to agree on that stat being a good thing. Democracy only works when as many people as possible participate.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Biden's path (Score:3, Informative)
jeopardizes the bodily autonomy of half the population. It's scary how many religious fundamentalists there are in a supposedly secular nation. And I saw more on the news the past week than the usual couple every few days. All supporting Trump as the "pro-life" candidate. The joke's on them, he's about as holy as a sack of goats' heads. Hypocrites all.
Re: (Score:3)
The US took some steps away from secularism in the 50s when they added a bunch of god stuff to their state apparatus. It was to differentiate themselves from the officially atheist communists. Stuff like that has long term consequences though.
Re:Biden's path (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Biden's path (Score:4, Insightful)
Talking of which, the polls seemed to be off by a large margin, does someone get a refund? Maybe polls should just be banned from 6 months before the relevant election.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Biden's path (Score:4, Informative)
Is there a site out there that simply shows the remaining states, how many electoral college votes they have and which way it's going in each of those states?
The BBC's [bbc.co.uk] interactive map is pretty clean. Not at-a-glance perfect, but all the latest data and details are just a click away.
Well... not all efforts (Score:5, Informative)
I read, I think on The Guardian, that he wants counting to continue in Arizona, where he's trailing, and stop in Pennsylvania (and others) where he's ahead -- at least as of this post. Typical, he wants it both ways that go his way.
Not a democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not a democracy (Score:5, Informative)
The US is not a pure democracy, it is a republic. Or, if you prefer, a "representative democracy". The difference is important. A pure democracy, which is what you seem to be cheering for, would be a horrible form of government - otherwise known as "mob rule".
The Electoral College exists for the same reason that the Senate exists: to prevent a few heavily populated regions from dominating the entire nation. Every non-totalitarian government that I am familiar with has similar institutions. A few countries - but only a few - select their Head of Government by pure popular vote. Some do not even involve the public - the Head of Government may be selected by the parliament.
The two-party system, on the other hand, really is a problem. it also is not any part of the US government. Rather, it is an artifact, an accidental side-effect of how the US counts votes: Every election is "winner takes all". Change to proportional voting, and smaller parties could survive.
Re: (Score:3)
The US is not a pure democracy, it is a republic. Or, if you prefer, a "representative democracy". The difference is important. A pure democracy, which is what you seem to be cheering for, would be a horrible form of government - otherwise known as "mob rule".
That's not what mob rule is. Mob rule is when a loud and generally violent mob dictates or influences policy outside of the defined, legitimate channels. Direct democracy where the people legitimately vote directly on policy issues (which is actually pretty common in the US, in the form of ballot initiatives) is, by definition, not "mob rule".
There are some problems with direct democracy, both logistical and practical, that generally make it more sensible to adopt a representative system, which is why nea
Re: (Score:3)
The Electoral College exists for the same reason that the Senate exists: to prevent a few heavily populated regions from dominating the entire nation.
Another, more honest way to say that is the Electoral College exists for the same reason that the number of representatives in the house is capped: to permit a few lightly populated regions to dominate the entire nation.
The beginning of the preamble says We The People, but then the Electoral College explicitly takes power OUT of the hands of The People. It's a vicious and violent attempt to keep the nation in the hands of The Powers That Be for ever and ever.
Re: Not a democracy (Score:4, Informative)
Hi, I live in Switzerland. We have a direct democracy, probably the purest you can find. The mob rule thingy is very restricted, because people realise they should think of the bigger picture. I think it's not as bad as you paint it. I'm not sure I know any country that does it better. Best thing: the federal council doesn't feel like rulers, more like executives carrying out the orders of the people. All other countries seem to have presidents for rulers, we have presidents that preside and follow.
Re: (Score:3)
That's the problem with the EC; it's specifically designed to prevent a few heavily populated regions from dominating the entire nation. It does this by artificially weighing low-population states, which allows them to dominate the entire nation. It simply moves where the 'battleground' states are.
Re: (Score:3)
The Electoral College exists for the same reason that the Senate exists: to prevent a few heavily populated regions from dominating the entire nation.
So instead it's better to have a bunch of people with more land dominate the majority who have less land. That's worse.
The EC system is bad for everyone. It also means the Republican party doesn't have to give a fuck about a bunch of the states in the middle because they could run a dead rat on a stick as president and still be guaranteed those EC votes. The E
Re: (Score:3)
Pennsylvania (Score:3, Insightful)
Ok, I'm not in the US, but I kind of see his points. If you look at the election sites, some of the data is...strange.
Take Reuters: If you click on the election map for details, you see Pennsylvania as listed "Lean Democratic" with Trump in the lead by 14.5% and 3/4 of the votes counted. For Trump to lose Pennsylvania, the remaining 1/4 of the votes would have to be more than 70% Biden to less than 30% Trump. So: to list this state as leaning towards Biden is strange at best. A conspiracy theorist might wonder if Retuers is displaying knowledge of semi-trucks of Biden ballots waiting to be discovered somewhere. Same source, Texas listed as a "toss-up". Trump has a 4% lead, and only 4% of the ballots remain to be counted. So Biden is going to get 100% of those remaining ballots?
Now, I don't actually think anyone is going to get away with large-scale fraud. There are too many eyes, too many people watching. What I do think is that the MSM just can't stop showing their bias, that they cannot bring themselves to admit that Trump has won the election. Roughly half the population of the US voted for Trump - you would never have guessed that from the press coverage running up to the election. Journalists have completely forgotten that - outside of editorial pieces - they are supposed to present facts and truth, not their personal biases.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Speaking of fraud the FBI is investigating robocalls telling people to stay home on polling day.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-p... [arstechnica.com]
Re:Pennsylvania (Score:5, Insightful)
For Trump to lose Pennsylvania, the remaining 1/4 of the votes would have to be more than 70% Biden to less than 30% Trump. So: to list this state as leaning towards Biden is strange at best.
Is it? Let me give you a summary of the past 6 months:
Trump: Mail voting is fraudulent, I'm going to shut it down, I'm going to fight the post office, we got to stop mail voting!
Biden: Vote early. Make sure you get your voice heard. Register for mail voting due to COVID, register for mail voting to avoid long queues!
Honestly with those messages I'd be very surprised if the split for the mail ballots is *only* 70/30.
The end of US democracy (Score:3)
Given that Trump has worked very hard and very publicly to undermine US democracy, and given the number of people who have voted for him regardless, democracy is dead in the US. The US may be able to hold on for a few more election cycles but ultimately both sides know that blatant lies and abuse of position is now allowed. Both sides know the other side will abuse anything they can get hold of.
With Trump or Biden the damage is done, the institutions that had public support since the founding of the US are actively distrusted by nearly half of the electorate.
The US can't return to a healthy democracy from it's current state.
Re: (Score:3)
Donnie projects again (Score:4)
This should come as a surprise to no one. (Score:4)
I saw someone refer to him as Mango Mussolini yesterday which is accurate, and he stacked the supreme court specifically for this outcome. He's a wannabe dictator.
He was going to claim victory no matter what, and hopefully the rule of law will fuck him hard and put his ass in jail once he realizes he can't pardon himself for state crimes.
Here is how it is done in other countries ... (Score:3)
Setting aside the baseless fraud claims by the fraudster in chief ...
This Canadian satire show 22 Minutes [youtube.com] explains how the elections are standardized across the country, using simple paper and pencil.
Same in Australia, and elsewhere ...
Works well ...
Re:Shocking! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Shocking! (Score:4, Insightful)
It is shocking for our country however. For a president to say such a thing, the message it sends to the rest of the world, and what it means for the future of our own country, is chilling.
Oh, I think the chilling part is that that Trump is at least close to winning with 65M+ people having voted for him. Why shouldn't he do this if at least 65 million people support his actions? He is a symptom rather than the problem.
Re: (Score:3)
"We squeak democracy but run to courts if it does something we don't like. We control the Supreme Court, our backup legislature!"
"So that's how you wanna play it? Treat the court as a pocket policy shotgun? Fine."
(40 years later)
"Whew! We finally we control it. It's sad it had to come to this, but whatevs."
"Change the rules! We'll pack the court so we can return it to our policy decisions."
"Wft."
Yes, that went down well.
Re:Shocking! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The most extensive voter fraud org in history! (Score:4, Informative)
Rather than just quote an organization like the federalist, which has a clear political stance, why don't you actually dig around and understand the the full context of what Biden said? When Biden said that he was talking about an organization to stop voter suppression, not encourage voter fraud. Yes Biden's way of expressing that is clumsy, but that's often the case with Biden.
Re:The most extensive voter fraud org in history! (Score:4, Insightful)
Rather than just quote an organization like the federalist, which has a clear political stance, why don't you actually dig around and understand the the full context of what Biden said? When Biden said that he was talking about an organization to stop voter suppression, not encourage voter fraud. Yes Biden's way of expressing that is clumsy, but that's often the case with Biden.
Simple answer to that?
Because they know and don't care. There are some people who voted for Trump because they honestly hate abortion. There are some that really honestly fear their guns will be taken. Whole bunch of specific stuff that's strong enough to override thoughts about character. The ones that really count, however, simply know exactly who he is. They know that every second word out of his mouth is a lie. They understand that he's destroying the lives of many people all over your country but they do. not. care. They think Trump gets power and will distribute it to the people who are loyal to him. They think they are in that gang. Some of them are right. Most of them are wrong, but they all hope and they don't care what the implications are for anyone else.
Saw that happening to some of our voters. Sudden realisation that "the man in the street" is trying to persuade you with arguments he, himself, knows are lies. It was a shock.
More complicated answer? Who knows? This particular one could be a "Russian disinformation agent" or just extremely stupid. Or a 4chan troll just baiting us. In the end people tend to get their opinions from someone else they trust. Enough of those people are now betraying their trust.
Re: (Score:3)
The ones that really count, however, simply know exactly who he is. They know that every second word out of his mouth is a lie.
I get that a lot of people don't care about Trump's character. And that under normal circumstances he would win easily.
But why are people letting the whole COVID fiasco slide? I was certain that would kill his reelection. Most of his supporters must know it is not a hoax and is actively and indiscriminately killing people.
Re:The most extensive voter fraud org in history! (Score:5, Insightful)
I get that a lot of people don't care about Trump's character. And that under normal circumstances he would win easily.
But why are people letting the whole COVID fiasco slide?
It's cult-like behavior at this point.
But I guess that's to be expected in the party that still caters to conservative christianity.
A major issue with religion is that you're required to believe what others tell you, despite no evidence for it or evidence of the contrary. You're conditioned to do that at a young age, and it's reinforced al your life. After all, religion would die out in a generation or two if we didn't allow for childhood indoctrination.
So republicans are now self-selecting to have a majority of members who will believe whatever a leader tells them. And this makes for a very unified, very focused voting block. It also makes them somewhat immune to reality, which in this case is very helpful to keep them voting.
Religion is a meme-virus abusing a loop-hole (Score:5, Insightful)
A major issue with religion is that you're required to believe what others tell you, despite no evidence for it or evidence of the contrary. You're conditioned to do that at a young age, and it's reinforced al your life. After all, religion would die out in a generation or two if we didn't allow for childhood indoctrination.
Well, indoctrination is what helps a specific religion to survive. But not religions or personality cults in general.
You see: Us naked great apes are basically pack animals with strong hierarchy. For million of years with have evolved to organise ourselves in small tribes with a strong leader. Even our hunting strategies required a somewhat leader giving indications (it's not restricted to the naked apres. Wolves are also organised in packs with leaders. And some people make the hypothesis that they got tamed into dog, precisely because we had very compatible hunting strategies back then. The human master basically being perfect super-alpha-wolves).
So even if here around /. we're mostly geeks and tend to be extremely strong individualists with a inborn distrust of other humans (we are mostly cat-like in our behaviour) and a preference for rational arguments, that's not the case of the general population (a big part of the humanity have more dog-like hierarchical behaviour).
Monotheistic religions are just some meme-viruses which managed to successfully exploit this strong attraction for a leader.
The gods on top of monotheistic mythologies are just super-stimuluses which resonnate very strongly with humanity's collective atttraction to strong leaders.
But religions per se do not *cause* unquestionned believes, they just leverage a *general tendency to follow an (in this case: immaginary, in the sky, super-) leader* that a sizeable part of humanity has (but not everyone).
Times of crisis tend to increase the general population's preference for "strong leaders" (this is part of the reason why WHO calls for an official "face" to be the source of scientific information during a pandemic crisis, to avoid a cult leader jumping in).
Turns out being a self-important narcisistic arse-hole is a very good way to fool this "yearn for a strong leader", and thus time of crisis, which would theoretically would be best handled by reasonning and scientific arguments, are in practice instead excellent opportunity for psychopaths to rise up the lader.
(Again, millions of years ago, a leader who is cold and calculating would be slightly better at making the tribe survive. So there is some evolutionnary reason to these preferences. But nowadays, cold calculating behaviour and absence of empathy can be easily confused with being a self-aborbed psychopath).
Adn thus you end up with countries democratically electing radical extremist self-service immature idiots at their helm during troubled times.
Re: (Score:3)
The COVID tracking project [covidtracking.com] numbers. Note how deaths should have been curving up this week following hospitalizations, but just entering election week the curve suddenly flattened and then today it's just started to go up again. Probably there will be a gradual release of deaths so that the curve continues upwards, just with a weeks delay. Presumably some extra verification step or change of method of counting just at the crucial moment?
Re:The most extensive voter fraud org in history! (Score:5, Informative)
I blame Trump for politicizing basic pandemic precautions like masks, and undermining expert advice at every turn.
Re: The most extensive voter fraud org in history! (Score:3)
> They know that every second word out of his mouth is a lie.
Oh, come on! You mean, "on average"!
Re: (Score:3)
"The economy, stupid" -James Carville
That is why Trump came back strong. Do you really thing the majority give a fuck about abortion? Why even mention it? Whatever factor it was, it was way at the bottom of the stack. It's about anti-lockdown so they can get back to work and pay the mortgage / rent.
I'll agree that it's the argument and always has been. I think by now, though, that most people understand that overall opening up damages the economy within about three months (look at what's going in the red states now [dangoodspeed.com] and how those states that stayed open are having to close down). I'm including people that care about their own mortgage now and "screw the country" in my group that hope trump treat them as part of the in crowd. See also my other comment [slashdot.org]. Those that honestly believe Trump is protecting
Re: (Score:3)
Whole bunch of specific stuff ...
A political panel today, made the point that politically, the CoVid pandemic wasn't about preventing a health crisis in the USA: It was individual (and state) rights versus the power of federal government.
Is that something public? I totally disagree personally, since the mistake wasn't in the legalistic actions, it was in the leadership actions. Trump needed to offer centralised purchasing, not force states to use it. Trump needed to make a set of central recommendations for quarantine and isolation and not attempt to enforce them internally in states. Trump needed to wear a mask and stand up and say "anyone not wearing a mask is a danger to Americans", not actually legally mandate masks. That's fine don
Re:The most extensive voter fraud org in history! (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a middle ground (3-valued logic, multi-valued logic).
Very importantly, in addition to resolving classical paradoxes of logic, paraconsistent relevance logics resolve many of the "paradoxes of relevance" which are extremely common (look it up on Wikipedia). For example the ad hominem attacks favored by Trump fall away as obvious fallacies.
Classically these are "informal fallacies" because "classical" binary logic fails to disambiguate them. You need at least a 3rd truth value ("maybe" or "both" or "unknown"), in which case, again, the typical fallacies used by politicians are held up to the light and seen to be incorrect.
Re:Shocking! (Score:5, Interesting)
It's worse than that. Best-case scenario, Trump leaves office without bloodshed but becomes King of the Professional Intolerant Asshats, an Alex Jones on steroids, and griefs the US with insane conspiracy politics for the rest of his life...until he hands off the mantle to one of his sons. Trumpism will haunt the US at least until the boomers are dead.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but those are for The Masked Singer so...
Re: (Score:3)
Mexico is sending billions of fraudulent ballots into the US. Sad.
Thats for building the wall is it not?
Re:A cheater is a cheater (Score:4)
His voters are okay with that, though.
For me it is actually the preferable outcome - I want the US fanboism of my country's political system to lose its appeal.
Re:So, msmash is what, a DNC employee? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not partisan to say that Trump's claims are baseless. That's a fact, it's way beyond the level of opinion. No reasonable interpretation of the data could conclude that Trump had won by 2 AM when he said that.
If you want these articles to stop then don't comment on them. Engagement and ad-impressions are why they keep appearing.
Claiming partisanship (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The numbers on the Guardian page show Biden leading in Michigan and far behind in PA. Nevada is a slight lead for Biden but with a lot of vote left to count.
It does look slightly better for Biden so far as I can tell.
I see the same thing from the BBC website (kind of ironic that you can get more granular info easily from UK sources than US ones since with the BBC is breaks down into districts as well). Very close in Nevada, the Wisconsin lead should hold, Michigan is close but should hold as well (most of the red, smaller districts are in the 90s but blue Detroit is still at 70%). Trump's lead in PA has narrowed somewhat, but I still don't know if they can pull in enough votes in Philly city/suburbs and Pittsburgh to
Re: (Score:3)
Something went wrong with your post - your link to a trusted news site must have been blocked. Can you reply to this and post the link again? Maybe use a URL shortener so that "Big Slashdot" won't block it.