806
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
806 points (96.8% liked)
politics
31224 readers
3151 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Their logic: My guy loses, "the election was rigged!", my guy wins, "power to the people!"
"Ah spoke to everybody at mah church and they all voted Trump! This must be rigged!"
I don't know if that's really a thought process separated by party lines.
Ehhh, in 2016 there was a lot of talk about election interference (which was corroborated by most, if not all, intelligence agencies) but not much about the election being illegitimate. It's a subtle but very important distinction.
It's the difference between saying "the refs weren't calling it our way at all" and "the refs conspired against us!"
What was Robert mueller investigating?
Election interference, collusion with Russia and subsequent obstruction of justice.
You can believe trump should have been impeached for those crimes but again, that's very different from saying the election itself was illegitimate. At no point in that investigation did Mueller (or, as far as I know any Democrat) argue that the votes were manipulated or altered once cast.
When Nixon was basically impeached (he resigned before that could happen as back then Republicans had integrity and would put party over country) it did not mean that the election itself was illegitimate.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html
https://nypost.com/2022/01/10/harris-comms-chief-called-bush-43-illegitimate-president/amp/
You'll note that neither of those articles has anyone saying the election was illegitimate.
In fact, the second one goes out of the way to say thay despite her disagreement with the call (Supreme court halting recounts strictly along party lines) the comms chief still respected the outcome, which is precisely the opposite of what trump did.
Dude come on.
Dude, I am making the exact claim I started with:
There is a huge difference between casting doubt on whether the votes are being accurately counted (the election being illegitimate) and whether someone acted improperly to win those votes (trying to.collude with Russia etc).
Do you understand the difference?