-
@Kirwan said in US Politics:
Likely result is Biden has won, IMO. But it's premature to say exactly what has happned until the election process is complete. And that includes the courts proceedings in what has been a very close election).
Gore was annouced the winner prematurely in the press in 2000, for example.
Should this now be the norm for all elections going forward or is there something specific about this one? I guess a concession from the losing candidate makes it a moot point - but how somehow doubt the same patience would have been given to Clinton if she tied the four narrowest states up in litigation.
It was the total opposite in 2000, Bush was prematurely declared the winner which elicited Gore's concession which was then retracted.
-
2016 was arguably the most anomalous presidential election in terms of popular vote compared to electors since USA politics became a contest between the Democratic and Republican Parties. Trump in 2016 didn't just lose the popular vote by a small margin and eke out a tight win like George W Bush in 2000, he was well behind in the popular vote, and yet actually won pretty big in the electoral college - when George W Bush was re-elected in 2004, he got a smaller electoral college victory while receiving a majority of 2.46% of the popular vote.
Trump flipped five states from Obama's win in 2012 by narrow margins in a result which could easily be interpreted as all kinds of fraudulent (complete with the late come-from-behind surges in key states like FL and PA), and yet the reaction here was simply that the polls must have been wrong (I scrolled back and checked). Absolutely nothing to suggest anything untoward at all.
Compare that to this election, when it looks like Biden has won by quite a margin when all is said and done, with an electoral college margin historically in line with his popular vote win, with a lead in the polls all the way through, and suddenly it's fraud city and conspiracy theories galore?
2020 vs 2016 election map charts courtesy of CNN. I'm sure more of these types of analyses will roll out over the coming months, but it's hard to see much in the way of patterns of fraud when Biden did so much better than Hillary vs Trump just about everywhere.
Here's a conspiracy for everyone - the winner was a centrist Democrat with well over 40 years political experience of working with very disparate groups in the coalition that is the Democratic Party, who was once the youngest Senator in history (minimum age is 30 and he was elected at 29, turning 30 before the official start date of his term), who drew together the Democratic Party using his vast experience and popularity, who was VP to a very popular president in Obama so plenty of experience in the White House to draw from, and Obama was campaigning for Joe much more strongly than for HIllary (she didn't really want either him or Bill to so they largely didn't).
Maybe instead of going down all the conspiracy rabbit holes that we didn't bother with in 2016 when the results were much more of an anomaly, we could just accept that Biden has probably won like the polls said he would, and if not or if there was fraud, it will all come out in the wash when the counts are rechecked in line with state laws.
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Kiwiwomble said in US Politics:
I did hear from admittedly probably left leaning presenter on a reasonably central podcast that one of the counter arguments to observers not being allowed in were that they may have been “extra” or un vetted, more than the agreed upon number or just republicans rocking up saying they wanted to observe
One of the observer who spoke at a Rudy event said they was properly vetted. and had all the required paperwork with them
Is this the one outside the landscaping company between the crematorium and adult toy store?
-
The only successful riggin in D.C.
-
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@canefan It was rigged. Rigged I tells ya!
We might find out soon enough. I assume a recount if done wouldn't use this overseas based Dominion software
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@canefan It was rigged. Rigged I tells ya!
We might find out soon enough. I assume a recount if done wouldn't use this overseas based Dominion software
Is it the software you don’t like or the fact that it is overseas? Either way you must have a rationale?
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@canefan It was rigged. Rigged I tells ya!
We might find out soon enough. I assume a recount if done wouldn't use this overseas based Dominion software
And the flaw was found and fixed under the post count analysis. That points to quite solid post-testing and does mean that one error means lots of errors
-
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@canefan It was rigged. Rigged I tells ya!
We might find out soon enough. I assume a recount if done wouldn't use this overseas based Dominion software
Is it the software you don’t like or the fact that it is overseas? Either way you must have a rationale?
The Dominion software doesn't seem to be that great. But based in Spain or Germany and run by an overseas company. What about all this drama about overseas (Russian) interference.
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@canefan It was rigged. Rigged I tells ya!
We might find out soon enough. I assume a recount if done wouldn't use this overseas based Dominion software
And the flaw was found and fixed under the post count analysis. That points to quite solid post-testing and does mean that one error means lots of errors
or it could mean the software is crap and its only one (of many) adjustment that was detected. A recount not using Dominion may be needed
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@canefan It was rigged. Rigged I tells ya!
We might find out soon enough. I assume a recount if done wouldn't use this overseas based Dominion software
Is it the software you don’t like or the fact that it is overseas? Either way you must have a rationale?
The Dominion software doesn't seem to be that great. But based in Spain or Germany and run by an overseas company. What about all this drama about overseas (Russian) interference.
I can’t see how you can conflate the two other than having the word “overseas” in common. One is an open and above board commercial transaction and the other is interference in the processes of a democratic election.
-
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@canefan It was rigged. Rigged I tells ya!
We might find out soon enough. I assume a recount if done wouldn't use this overseas based Dominion software
Is it the software you don’t like or the fact that it is overseas? Either way you must have a rationale?
The Dominion software doesn't seem to be that great. But based in Spain or Germany and run by an overseas company. What about all this drama about overseas (Russian) interference.
I can’t see how you can conflate the two other than having the word “overseas” in common. One is an open and above board commercial transaction and the other is interference in the processes of a democratic election.
So Russians posting a few tweets is terrible. But having an overseas company tabulating the results using an overseas servers is fine. And the software is so crap it allows votes to be switched
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@canefan It was rigged. Rigged I tells ya!
We might find out soon enough. I assume a recount if done wouldn't use this overseas based Dominion software
And the flaw was found and fixed under the post count analysis. That points to quite solid post-testing and does mean that one error means lots of errors
or it could mean the software is crap and its only one (of many) adjustment that was detected. A recount not using Dominion may be needed
Again, leaping all the way to a worst case scenario when there is no evidence that points there.
The problem could be user error, could be a bug. The fact that you even know about it means that the processes are sound and are self regulating.
This scattergun approach pointing out small events as indications of a massive problem is not doing the process a service. Let things play out, do the corrections the way they were designed and look at the washup.
It would not surprise me one bit given the slim margins in some states that a State called Blue ends up Red. That does not mean that they all will.
As far as I know all sttes with close margins (I think it is 1%) automatically recount simply because they know that there is a possibility of errors. That has always been in place as an assurance and doesn't require lawsuits. It also doesn't point to a large scale failure or conspiracy. -
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@canefan It was rigged. Rigged I tells ya!
We might find out soon enough. I assume a recount if done wouldn't use this overseas based Dominion software
Is it the software you don’t like or the fact that it is overseas? Either way you must have a rationale?
The Dominion software doesn't seem to be that great. But based in Spain or Germany and run by an overseas company. What about all this drama about overseas (Russian) interference.
I can’t see how you can conflate the two other than having the word “overseas” in common. One is an open and above board commercial transaction and the other is interference in the processes of a democratic election.
So Russians posting a few tweets is terrible. But having an overseas company tabulating the results using an overseas servers is fine. And the software is so crap it allows votes to be switched
Glad you have indepth knowledge of how the software works.
To extend your argument are you saying that every democratic country should have there own SSAS for vote counting because you can't trust other countries? Who then runs these internal organisations? Where do you draw the line? As we can see the US is a divided country. Can a US firm really be trusted? -
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@canefan It was rigged. Rigged I tells ya!
We might find out soon enough. I assume a recount if done wouldn't use this overseas based Dominion software
Is it the software you don’t like or the fact that it is overseas? Either way you must have a rationale?
The Dominion software doesn't seem to be that great. But based in Spain or Germany and run by an overseas company. What about all this drama about overseas (Russian) interference.
I can’t see how you can conflate the two other than having the word “overseas” in common. One is an open and above board commercial transaction and the other is interference in the processes of a democratic election.
So Russians posting a few tweets is terrible. But having an overseas company tabulating the results using an overseas servers is fine. And the software is so crap it allows votes to be switched
To extend your argument are you saying that every democratic country should have there own SSAS for vote counting because you can't trust other countries?
Yes yes yes (how hard would it be to set one up). and tight security control including an audit trail that can't be adjusted
Esper fired. It was always on the cards
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@canefan It was rigged. Rigged I tells ya!
We might find out soon enough. I assume a recount if done wouldn't use this overseas based Dominion software
Is it the software you don’t like or the fact that it is overseas? Either way you must have a rationale?
The Dominion software doesn't seem to be that great. But based in Spain or Germany and run by an overseas company. What about all this drama about overseas (Russian) interference.
I can’t see how you can conflate the two other than having the word “overseas” in common. One is an open and above board commercial transaction and the other is interference in the processes of a democratic election.
So Russians posting a few tweets is terrible. But having an overseas company tabulating the results using an overseas servers is fine. And the software is so crap it allows votes to be switched
Thank you but I shall decline your invitation to descend down this particular rabbit hole of your choice. I was, somewhat naively, hoping for an actual discussion.
Ach well.
-
@Catogrande get in line bro harder than getting a quarantine voucher for Xmas!!
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@canefan It was rigged. Rigged I tells ya!
We might find out soon enough. I assume a recount if done wouldn't use this overseas based Dominion software
Is it the software you don’t like or the fact that it is overseas? Either way you must have a rationale?
The Dominion software doesn't seem to be that great. But based in Spain or Germany and run by an overseas company. What about all this drama about overseas (Russian) interference.
I can’t see how you can conflate the two other than having the word “overseas” in common. One is an open and above board commercial transaction and the other is interference in the processes of a democratic election.
So Russians posting a few tweets is terrible. But having an overseas company tabulating the results using an overseas servers is fine. And the software is so crap it allows votes to be switched
To extend your argument are you saying that every democratic country should have there own SSAS for vote counting because you can't trust other countries?
Yes yes yes (how hard would it be to set one up). and tight security control including an audit trail that can't be adjusted
Not as easy as you seem to think. That would be why a handful of businesses around the world have invested time and money into creating a product that does the job.
What makes you think that there aren't security controls? The 'evidence' you point to shows that they actually work. Anomolies are being searched for, found and corrected.
This desperation for finding something and blaming everything is pathetic. Turn the arguments around from last time, when at least the Dems had popular vote on their side as a start point, and let the processes play out.
You do realise that 5million more US voters wanted a senile old man over Trump? That is a pretty strong indication of who 'should' win and hardly provides a platform for Trump supporters to chase every rabbit.
US Politics