On audits, elections and public trust

[Mayan Elephant]

Is denying credit to Goebbels essential for Trumpian advocacy?

no. But apparently having Nazi associations is fine with you. Your question is insight into your bad taste, poor judgment and gullibility. It has no reflection on anyone other than you, and it looks bad pal. Real bad. Try making cogent arguments instead of spewing stupidnesses.

[Chap]

Is denying credit to Goebbels essential for Trumpian advocacy?

no. But apparently having Nazi associations is fine with you. And the assertion that acknowledging credit is part of anything that you made up is insight into your bad taste, poor judgment and gullibility. It has no reflection on anyone other than you, and it looks bad pal. Real bad. Try making cogent arguments instead of spewing stupidnesses.

The point made by Moksha is in fact quite valid, though it is shocking that this is the case. Trump is not a Nazi, even though he is not a very nice person. There was a complex (though perverse and evil) ideological content to German National Socialism that Trump is quite ignorant of.

But one tactic he does practice to is one that Hitler's associate Joseph Goebbels advocated as a means to political success: lie often, and lie big. US democracy has never before met anybody who practiced this so ruthlessly and consistently, and it has helped him to capture and hold the allegiance of a large slice of American voters. And if you try to tell them what he is doing they simply dismiss you as a representative of the dreaded Main Stream Media.

Facts just don't matter very much for him and his supporters any more. But the real world still runs on them, which makes for a rather dangerous situation.

[Mayan Elephant]

Chap, that’s dumb. you're saying facts don't matter to anyone? Or that they only do not matter for people that voted for Trump? Do you think that with facts, someone would vote for Biden?

Christ, what a joke. These bombastic statements like yours are just not interesting. It is just powder keg stuff. Have fun with that, and brace yourself. Because if that level of stupid is the best America’s got for the conversation, we got a real problem. I hope you're just stupid, and not stupid and cloned.

Say smarter stuff. This wah wah wah needling petulant crap is only meant to trigger people. Do conversation better.

[Moksha]

This wah wah wah needling petulant crap is only meant to trigger people.

I doubt Sister Wendy's History of Art would trigger anyone, at least those who have viewed Bob Ross's art tutorials.

[Mayan Elephant]

While Joseph Goebbels might mention Trump overdid it by lying about everything even when such lies were unnecessary, he would congratulate him on being one of the foremost advocates for the Big Lie. This tactic of lying about everything has altered everything about the Republican party. The party now concerns itself with self-interest and domination by subverting the electoral process.

Today's Republicans note that the time for tyranny is now and that they can deliver it.

I want to revisit this. I think it is important. Very important.

I think it goes to the core of what Honor and Gadianton have been pointing out, points they both clarified and for which they sough clarification. I think too, that this is another highlight of where I stand and how I may be different than other democrats, of which I was one up until January 2021, and also how I may be different from other people that voted for Trump, which I did in the 2020 election (but not in 2016). Those key points - Belief and Credibility.

As I understand it, "The Big Lie" is a term that was coined by critics to describe what Trump was saying or doing post-election. CNN and others used this specifically to make the Nazi stain on Trump. THAT was a fookin lie or propaganda. Trump, never to be outdone when it comes to outlandishness, flipped it and used the term to describe the election. That was a fookin lie or propaganda too. What we have here, is a battle of BS. Complete, absolute, BS.

Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, who peddles this "big lie" nonsense does so at the immediate expense and sacrifice of credibility. There are no exceptions to that. If you peddle this nonsense from the CNN re-vomit machine, you may get a thumbs up from your bros, but it is at a price. If you peddle this big lie BS from the pandemic war room, you may get a thumbs up from your bros, but it is at a price. The "big lie" is a perfect example of how Blue Anon and QAnon are the same goddamn thing, just whackass nutjobs who prefer propaganda over facts, who prefer spun-out BS over work, who prefer a conspiracy/hoax over reality, who prefer submission over surrendering to reality. On the one hand, you have a side saying there is a big lie, and on the other side you have a side saying the big lie is a big lie and Goebbels is whispering in everyone's ear. THEY ARE BOTH FULL OF SH1T.

Where do I stand on this? I think that the CNN left is out of their goddamn minds on this one and I feel bad for anyone that believes it as a means of soothing themselves. I think that Trump had the worst lawyers in the history of lawyers and did a huge disservice to himself and to all of us by lawyering poorly. But, he was not wrong that the election deserved scrutiny. His strategy failed, and we never got the evidence, hearings, audits or truth. All we have are dueling banjos of BS. Nobody can claim to have evidence of fraud, in my opinion. And nobody can claim that the lack of evidence is proof of a goddamn thing. The courts made sure of that. The failure to audit the signatures, custody, compliance and process in a timely manner made sure of that. All we have, is the final count (Biden won and GA went to two Senate runoffs. No question on both outcomes.)

Now, here is where we fight, right? Right here.... the point where all y'all's heads exploded.... here>>>> [Trump] was not wrong that the election deserved scrutiny. Trump was absolutely right. He was right, because without that scrutiny, credibility in future elections is at risk or gone, and belief in our system of government and process for governing is diminished. And this, frankly, gives Trump a hell of a lot more credibility on this topic than the screaming clowns yelling "Big lie is a big lie."

Scrutinizing that election was a metric lot more important than who became president. It was a means of rebuilding confidence in our system. instead, scrutinizing an election is still a triggering insult to many. I hope I never return to being the person that is threatened by the truth. I have tried that out and it got me hurt and it got others hurt. And, I paid a lot of tithing along the way.

So, carry on. Call it a big lie. Go for it. Just know, that doing so may get you some upvotes or some damn thing. It comes at a price, and the price ain't good. And... dare I say it..... the same applies to "Insurrection" when it is misused. Go for it. Say it loud and say it often. You may gain a lot of friends along the way, but if it is just BS then you will just get crappy compliments. You better be able to back it up with sources other then Dan Lemon and Keith O. Credibility matters. Belief in the system matters. And we are going down the wrong path on both at lightning speed here.

[Icarus]

While Joseph Goebbels might mention Trump overdid it by lying about everything even when such lies were unnecessary, he would congratulate him on being one of the foremost advocates for the Big Lie. This tactic of lying about everything has altered everything about the Republican party. The party now concerns itself with self-interest and domination by subverting the electoral process.

Today's Republicans note that the time for tyranny is now and that they can deliver it.

I want to revisit this. I think it is important. Very important.

I think it goes to the core of what Honor and Gadianton have been pointing out, points they both clarified and for which they sough clarification. I think too, that this is another highlight of where I stand and how I may be different than other democrats, of which I was one up until January 2021, and also how I may be different from other people that voted for Trump, which I did in the 2020 election (but not in 2016). Those key points - Belief and Credibility.

As I understand it, "The Big Lie" is a term that was coined by critics to describe what Trump was saying or doing post-election. CNN and others used this specifically to make the Nazi stain on Trump. THAT was a fookin lie or propaganda. Trump, never to be outdone when it comes to outlandishness, flipped it and used the term to describe the election. That was a fookin lie or propaganda too. What we have here, is a battle of B.S.. Complete, absolute, B.S..

Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, who peddles this "big lie" nonsense does so at the immediate expense and sacrifice of credibility. There are no exceptions to that. If you peddle this nonsense from the CNN re-vomit machine, you may get a thumbs up from your bros, but it is at a price. If you peddle this big lie B.S. from the pandemic war room, you may get a thumbs up from your bros, but it is at a price. The "big lie" is a perfect example of how Blue Anon and QAnon are the same goddamn thing, just whackass nutjobs who prefer propaganda over facts, who prefer spun-out B.S. over work, who prefer a conspiracy/hoax over reality, who prefer submission over surrendering to reality. On the one hand, you have a side saying there is a big lie, and on the other side you have a side saying the big lie is a big lie and Goebbels is whispering in everyone's ear. THEY ARE BOTH FULL OF SH1T.

Where do I stand on this? I think that the CNN left is out of their goddamn minds on this one and I feel bad for anyone that believes it as a means of soothing themselves. I think that Trump had the worst lawyers in the history of lawyers and did a huge disservice to himself and to all of us by lawyering poorly. But, he was not wrong that the election deserved scrutiny. His strategy failed, and we never got the evidence, hearings, audits or truth. All we have are dueling banjos of B.S.. Nobody can claim to have evidence of fraud, in my opinion. And nobody can claim that the lack of evidence is proof of a goddamn thing. The courts made sure of that. The failure to audit the signatures, custody, compliance and process in a timely manner made sure of that. All we have, is the final count (Biden won and GA went to two Senate runoffs. No question on both outcomes.)

Now, here is where we fight, right? Right here.... the point where all y'all's heads exploded.... here>>>> [Trump] was not wrong that the election deserved scrutiny. Trump was absolutely right. He was right, because without that scrutiny, credibility in future elections is at risk or gone, and belief in our system of government and process for governing is diminished. And this, frankly, gives Trump a hell of a lot more credibility on this topic than the screaming clowns yelling "Big lie is a big lie."

Scrutinizing that election was a metric lot more important than who became president. It was a means of rebuilding confidence in our system. instead, scrutinizing an election is still a triggering insult to many. I hope I never return to being the person that is threatened by the truth. I have tried that out and it got me hurt and it got others hurt. And, I paid a lot of tithing along the way.

So, carry on. Call it a big lie. Go for it. Just know, that doing so may get you some upvotes or some damn thing. It comes at a price, and the price ain't good. And... dare I say it..... the same applies to "Insurrection" when it is misused. Go for it. Say it loud and say it often. You may gain a lot of friends along the way, but if it is just B.S. then you will just get crappy compliments. You better be able to back it up with sources other then Dan Lemon and Keith O. Credibility matters. Belief in the system matters. And we are going down the wrong path on both at lightning speed here.

It would be nice if you had some concept of your own stupidity. You say you don't support trump yet you voted for him. You say you don't have any evidence of fraud yet you refuse to vote because the elections aren't credible. You throw up that reference to "Blue Anon" and think that by emphasizing your idiotic remarks with "God Damned" that this somehow makes them less idiotic. You're wrong. Your hysterical fear of CNN and real news outlets is noted. Your stupid adoration of conspiracy theories from the vaccine to the election, is also noted. The big lie is precisely that, the big lie. Mocking those for having the intellectual fortitude to acknowledge the lie for what it is makes you look dumber than you already are.

[Mayan Elephant]

It would be nice if you had some concept of your own stupidity. You say you don't support trump yet you voted for him. You say you don't have any evidence of fraud yet you refuse to vote because the elections aren't credible. You throw up that reference to "Blue Anon" and think that by emphasizing your idiotic remarks with "God Damned" that this somehow makes them less idiotic. You're wrong. Your hysterical fear of CNN and real news outlets is noted. Your stupid adoration of conspiracy theories from the vaccine to the election, is also noted. The big lie is precisely that, the big lie. Mocking those for having the intellectual fortitude to acknowledge the lie for what it is makes you look dumber than you already are.

Excellent post. I could not have said it better myself.

You have twisted what I have said, and that makes the post even more excellent. I have no adoration of conspiracy theories, jackass. I certainly do not have an adoration of conspiracy theories about vaccines, jackass.

Again, thanks for the post. The ridiculousness is an emphatic endorsement of what I shared. I particularly enjoyed "real news outlets." Next time though, be a better communicator and clarify that I mock the Big Lie, and the Big Lie Big Lie, goddamnit.

[Chap]

I think that Trump [...] was not wrong that the election deserved scrutiny.

What objective reasons can you give us for thinking that the 2020 election in particular 'deserved scrutiny' in a way that its recent predecessors did not?

[Mayan Elephant]

I think that Trump [...] was not wrong that the election deserved scrutiny.

What objective reasons can you give us for thinking that the 2020 election in particular 'deserved scrutiny' in a way that its recent predecessors did not?

Great question.

1: Statistical anomalies in the number of ballots received by mail, the time and means that ballots were received, and the qualitative and quantitative verification of signatures was worth scrutinizing. It served everyone well to establish credibility on all those issues. Again, more so for the credibility of the process than the credibility of the outcome.

2: Changes to the election process made by individuals other than the legislature happened in many states. The effect of those changes deserved scrutiny for several reasons, including constitutionality. There are also quantitative and qualitative concerns because of those changes. Again, more important to establish credibility of the process than credibility of the outcome.

3: The timing of the counting deserved scrutiny. Again, more important to establish credibility of the process than credibility of the outcome.

You asked for reasons that I could give. Other people have different reasons and different priorities. Their reasons and priorities are not irrelevant. At this point, it does not matter does it? The scrutiny was shot down and we will never have evidence one way or another (other than the final vote count), just a level of faith in things that were not satisfactorily settled. For me, that faith or belief is lower than it was prior to the election and prior to the standing then laches decisions. For others, that faith is higher now because Biden won and Trump lost.

[Gadianton]

Mayan,

I realize you have two threads going on this with your back to against the wall, which is why originally I kept my material to a minimum. I waited until today to respond to your latest post, to give you a breather. I realize that you're about done.

Trump was leading, and doing it poorly, in this process. But he would not have been doing anything if the people did not want it. I flat out reject the assertion that the people were behind Trump in this. In my opinion, he was representing his constituents more than he was leading them

Oh I agree. To that small extent we're on the same page. Where we likely disagree is that to me, real evidence means nothing to him or his broader base. Both he and his broader base see "win for Trump" as the evidence that the election was fair. I made the point earlier that he ordered the election stopped halfway through counting votes because he knew he already won. That mentality isn't one that is concerned about the rules.

Fraud is not limited just to ballots being cast. It can and will include that. It can also include how they are counted,

Well yes, my original point was that your position seemed oddly out of alignment with the party you voted with. My point regarding Brad from Georgia wasn't only about the coercion to invent votes, but about Trump's suspicion of malicious machine parts that miscounted the votes. Even if you can achieve sweeping election reform, it's pointless in regard to public trust. Such low-brow suspicions as "dirty parts in that vote-countin' machine" will always be possible, and thanks to "Stop the Steal" probable with near certainty, no matter how tidy election processes are cleaned up. To put my position sharply: The Stop the Steal movement is a pretext for infinite distrust; not for cleaning house. While I generally agree with the ID thing, obviously, the reasoning behind it isn't fairness, but the time constraint it puts on the opponent. Like I said, I think democrats should own it either way.

And for Trump's bad lawyers: Trump is the undisputed king of litigation. If the main with 10,000 lawsuits in his rearview mirror, if he couldn't find a good lawyer to represent him, then he's too incompetent to be president, for that reason alone.