politics
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 politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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 a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Whew. I did, in fact, read it.
There was no need to be rude in your post about it.
Turns out the numbers are still being updated. They've gone up about since you posted (and funny enough, Trump no longer has above 50% of the vote - i.e. the mandate of the people). I'll admit that I was getting my information from Stephen Spoonamoore, and that the data does not match up with the current results. I went and pulled the numbers as well and it looks like it's even lower than what you found based on comparison to Senate data. However, I'm not a security specialist, nor am I a data analyst. I was deferring to people that have more experience than me.
That said, I'm not saying that it was rigged - I am however saying that a bunch of weird shit happened, and I'm hoping that someone looks into deeper JUST TO BE SURE. It looks like Pennsylvania is actually doing a recount - if they come back with nothing, I'll shut up about it. And yes, it's entirely skepticism, I'm not in denial about Trump winning.
I don't get why there's such a hesitation about being sure of something. It's like smelling smoke, and being told to stfu about there being a fire...that everything is working as intended. Like, do I have "evidence" of there being a fire? No, but....why tf wouldn't we just establish that nothing is on fire, just to be on the safe side.
I 100% agree that none of the things suggested are "evidence," but without some sort of investigation, no one will ever actually be able to get any evidence.
If you actually wind up responding, try not to strawman me this time as some sort of election denier, "do your own research" kook. I didn't do that to you, did I?
Yeah fair enough. I think I was responding in tone more to the OP and other desperate conspiracy theorists who are clinging to the hope, against all evidence, that the election was somehow stolen from the democrats. Given Republicans now will have majorities in the house, senate, state legislatures, supreme court, governorships, and will control the executive branch -- not to mention the anticipated purge of federal agencies and loyalist-stuffing -- I find it very important that democrats level with themselves instead of looking for excuses.
While it's true Trump lost an absolute majority, the republican candidate still beat the democratic candidate by about 2.5 million votes, with about 98.9% votes counted. And, as you noted, recounts in some counties and states are occurring, and the FBI has been, and as far as I know still is, investigating questions and concerns about the election being hacked since at least August.
That said, I take your point, and I'm sorry for being so derisive in the tone of my response. I appreciate your level-headed reply.