The 2020 Big Lie just took a(nother) big hit

[The Barbarian]

Six days after Election Day 2020, then-President Donald Trump tweeted this: "Nevada is turning out to be a cesspool of Fake Votes." He added that when the findings were released, "will be absolutely shocking!"

On Wednesday night, Nevada Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske, a Republican, announced that her office had found zero "evidentiary support" for claims of fraud or bias in the Silver State's 2020 election results.

That total rejection of Trump's claim that the state was a "cesspool of Fake Votes" comes on top of a near-unanimous series of legal and political defeats in recent months for Trump's Big Lie -- the unfounded claims of widespread election fraud in key states. Just earlier this week, the Supreme Court rejected a case brought by several Pennsylvania Republicans arguing that the state's judiciary had overstepped its authority by expanding ballot deadlines during the heart of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020.
The 2020 Big Lie just took a(nother) big hit

Not that facts are going to change the views of the Kool-Aid sippers...

Lou Dobbs Wonders Why It’s Been So Hard ‘Finding Actual Proof’ Of Election Fraud

“Eight weeks from the election, and we still don’t have verifiable, tangible support for the crimes that everyone knows were committed,” the Fox Business host said.
Lou Dobbs Wonders Why It's Been So Hard 'Finding Actual Proof' Of Election Fraud | HuffPost

It's not that hard to figure out, Lou; either Joe Biden is an uber-genius, who has been able to hide things no human could have done before, and all the state and federal judges (including Trump appointees) are in on the massive conspiracy, or... you're stuffed with prunes.

Most Americans know which of those is the case.

One of those.

 

[Der Alte]

Six days after Election Day 2020, then-President Donald Trump tweeted this: "Nevada is turning out to be a cesspool of Fake Votes." He added that when the findings were released, "will be absolutely shocking!"
On Wednesday night, Nevada Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske, a Republican, announced that her office had found zero "evidentiary support" for claims of fraud or bias in the Silver State's 2020 election results.
That total rejection of Trump's claim that the state was a "cesspool of Fake Votes" comes on top of a near-unanimous series of legal and political defeats in recent months for Trump's Big Lie -- the unfounded claims of widespread election fraud in key states. Just earlier this week, the Supreme Court rejected a case brought by several Pennsylvania Republicans arguing that the state's judiciary had overstepped its authority by expanding ballot deadlines during the heart of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020.
The 2020 Big Lie just took a(nother) big hit
Not that facts are going to change the views of the Kool-Aid sippers...
Lou Dobbs Wonders Why It’s Been So Hard ‘Finding Actual Proof’ Of Election Fraud

“Eight weeks from the election, and we still don’t have verifiable, tangible support for the crimes that everyone knows were committed,” the Fox Business host said.
Lou Dobbs Wonders Why It's Been So Hard 'Finding Actual Proof' Of Election Fraud | HuffPost
It's not that hard to figure out, Lou; either Joe Biden is an uber-genius, who has been able to hide things no human could have done before, and all the state and federal judges (including Trump appointees) are in on the massive conspiracy, or... you're stuffed with prunes.
Most Americans know which of those is the case.
One of those.

How many times has JB said to the press, at briefings etc. "I'm not supposed to answer questions?" etc?

White House press secretary Jen Psaki tells Biden not to take questions
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...-house-video-feed-ended-biden-took-questions/
I wonder if JB had advisors running interference for him all along?

 

[iarwain]

I don't personally believe the election was stolen (which is not to say there wasn't any fraud). But there were many things about the "Covid emergency voting" that I am not comfortable with. And now the Democrats want to keep the Covid voting rules, and claim that anyone who doesn't are racists.

Everyone should want voting to be secure, and should want everyone to be comfortable with the legitimacy of the results. Unfortunately, that hasn't been the case for the last several elections.

 

[Halbhh]

I don't personally believe the election was stolen (which is not to say there wasn't any fraud). But there were many things about the "Covid emergency voting" that I am not comfortable with. And now the Democrats want to keep the Covid voting rules, and claim that anyone who doesn't are racists.

Everyone should want voting to be secure, and should want everyone to be comfortable with the legitimacy of the results. Unfortunately, that hasn't been the case for the last several elections.

Sure, but... the election has been shown to have been very secure....

So... are the new laws in some details really about making it harder for the poor to vote, so as to shave off a few percent of them?... Prevent some from voting.

To better help Republicans win close states...?

Looks that way to me.

 

[The Barbarian]

How many times has JB said to the press, at briefings etc. "I'm not supposed to answer questions?" etc?

Die älteren replies:
Less often than most, it seems. At any rate, while he managed to outsmart all of his democrat rivals and his republican opponent, the salient feature of Biden's administration seems to be one of finding people who know the most about each problem, and learning from them.

Seems to be working. A lot better than whatever else was tried last administration. He's a smart guy.

But I don't think any human is smart enough to pull off the kind of huge conspiracy necessary to steal a presidential election, while leaving no evidence whatever. No one has ever managed that kind of thing. Too many people have to be involved, and people talk. Talking isn't evidence, of course, but if it's true, it point to evidence.

And as Lou sullenly admits, there is no evidence.

 

[iarwain]

.So... are the new laws in some details really about making it harder for the poor to vote, so as to shave off a few percent of them?... Prevent some from voting.

Anyone who wants to vote can vote.

 

[Halbhh]

Anyone who wants to vote can vote.

Sure. Or... even if working 2 jobs and the waiting line during your brief available time is long....? And early voting days have been drastically reduced....

 

[GreekOrthodox]

Anyone who wants to vote can vote.

Work in an urban polling station sometime. You'll see that by reducing the number of stations or locating them out in inaccessible areas, you create long lines. People who can ill afford to take a day off lose a day's wages. Compare that to a suburban polling location. Maybe a 15-20 minute way, rather than hours. You can come in early or later in the day. Longest I ever had to wait in the suburbs was about 30 minutes.

 

[The Barbarian]

Anyone who wants to vote can vote.

Assuming they can afford to jump through all the hoops. This is why republicans are trying to make it more difficult to vote. As Trump admitted, if everyone voted, no republican would be elected.

Paul Weyrich, an early promoter of voter suppression openly admitted their goal:

More than 30 years ago, an influential conservative leader explained why his movement shouldn’t “want everybody to vote.”


Paul Weyrich, an operative considered to be the “founding father of the conservative movement” because of his hand in founding the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), the Heritage Foundation, Moral Majority, the Council for National Policy and other influential conservative groups, laid out the GOP’s voter suppression strategy in a 1980 speech in Dallas.


“I don’t want everybody to vote,” he said. “Elections are not won by a majority of people. They never have been from the beginning of our country, and they are not now. As a matter of fact our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.”
Seven Times Conservatives Have Admitted They Don't Want People To Vote | Right Wing Watch

 

[Der Alte]

Sure. Or... even if working 2 jobs and the waiting line during your brief available time is long....? And early voting days have been drastically reduced....

I have been voting since the late 50s why has all this only become a problem in the last year or so?

 

[Albion]

Work in an urban polling station sometime. You'll see that by reducing the number of stations or locating them out in inaccessible areas, you create long lines. People who can ill afford to take a day off lose a day's wages.

And if someone has that problem, being allowed to vote by mail or dropbox, at any time up to a month in advance of election day, isn't going to work for them????

Really?

 

[The Barbarian]

I have been voting since the late 50s why has all this only become a problem in the last year or so?

Two reasons:
1. One party has now adopted Weyrich's idea that it's not necessary to present a platform that Americans will approve; one can just as easily bend the rules to limit the voting of people who will not approve of the platform one has. A loss of nerve, and a rejection of the concept of government by the people.

2. The decline in values in politics. Honesty and honor mean very little now. And that's true of many on the left as well. Take McConnell's refusal to even bring Obama's court nominee to a vote, because he was in his last year in office. But he cynically ignored that excuse for Trump's nominee. Because to him and most of his fellows, winning was more important than integrity.

Can you imagine Reagan's response, if someone told him that the way republicans would win was to cheat people out of their voting rights? He'd have thrown them out the window.

 

[The Barbarian]

And if someone has that problem, being allowed to vote by mail or dropbox, at any time up to a month in advance of election day, isn't going to work for them????

Really?

You're right. That would work for them. Which is why republicans are working to stop all of that as much as possible. If they didn't limit that as much as possible, it would defeat the whole purpose of the "ballot security" plan.

This is why we see them going to such ludicrous extremes as making it a crime to offer a drink of water to an elderly person in a long voting line. Every little cheat helps.

 

[The Barbarian]

Work in an urban polling station sometime. You'll see that by reducing the number of stations or locating them out in inaccessible areas, you create long lines. People who can ill afford to take a day off lose a day's wages. Compare that to a suburban polling location. Maybe a 15-20 minute way, rather than hours. You can come in early or later in the day. Longest I ever had to wait in the suburbs was about 30 minutes.

One classic attempt was in Texas, where the (republican) Governor ruled there could be only one drop box for ballots in each county. So one Texas county, with a few hundred people got a drop box. And so did Harris County in which Houston sits, with about six million people.

He was shamed by threats of lawsuits, to relent on that scheme. Apparently voters would have about 1/8 of a second each if they all wanted to vote by drop box. But of course, the box wouldn't hold even a tiny fraction of the ballots

 

[Der Alte]

Two reasons:
1. One party has now adopted Weyrich's idea that it's not necessary to present a platform that Americans will approve; one can just as easily bend the rules to limit the voting of people who will not approve of the platform one has. A loss of nerve, and a rejection of the concept of government by the people.

2. The decline in values in politics. Honesty and honor mean very little now. And that's true of many on the left as well. Take McConnell's refusal to even bring Obama's court nominee to a vote, because he was in his last year in office. But he cynically ignored that excuse for Trump's nominee. Because to him and most of his fellows, winning was more important than integrity.

Can you imagine Reagan's response, if someone told him that the way republicans would win was to cheat people out of their voting rights? He'd have thrown them out the window.

Meaningless vague generalities. Nothing I have seen or been made aware of tells anyone red and yellow, black and white they can't vote that is their right. What party was the female politician who screaming told her followers,

“Let’s make sure we show up wherever we have to show up,” [she] told a crowd in California over the weekend. “If you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd, and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere?”​

 

[RDKirk]

I have been voting since the late 50s why has all this only become a problem in the last year or so?

There have always been problems since the late 50s. That's why the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965...or do you think that was also unnecessary, since you were voting since the 50s?

 

[Der Alte]

There have always been problems since the late 50s. That's why the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965...or do you think that was also unnecessary, since you were voting since the 50s?

That was 56 years ago. Is there any problem now occurring which has any affect on the Voting Rights Act? How about voter ID I frequently have to show ID for many things. I am a disabled vet every time I go to VA I have to show ID, fly somewhere? ID! Etc. etc.

 

[The Barbarian]

Meaningless vague generalities.

I can't imagine a more micromanaging system than "don't you dare offer an old lady in a long voting line, a drink of water." The voter suppression laws being attempted today are full of just such specific attempts to discourage voting.

Nothing I have seen or been made aware of tells anyone red and yellow, black and white they can't vote that is their right.

It's so much easier to just put voting locations far from their homes, limit them to just a few places to insure long lines, and try to limit voting to times when wage earners will have to clock out to go vote.

Oh, and maybe include armed vigilante "election watchers" to intimidate voters. That's what got the republican party banned from voter suppression activities the last time.

 

[The Barbarian]

That was 56 years ago. Is there any problem now occurring which has any affect on the Voting Rights Act?

The Supreme Court just invalidated much of the Voting Rights Act. You couldn't have done the things Georgia just did to suppress voting, otherwise.
Supreme Court Invalidates Key Part of Voting Rights Act (Published 2013)

 

[RDKirk]

That was 56 years ago. Is there any problem now occurring which has any affect on the Voting Rights Act? How about voter ID I frequently have to show ID for many things. I am a disabled vet every time I go to VA I have to show ID, fly somewhere? ID! Etc. etc.

It's interesting that gun owners (of which I am one) manage to get "Constitutional carry" passed on the premise that having to identify oneself in the practice of a constitutional right is blatantly unconstitutional.