The 2016 US General Election

[TopHatter]

Trump makes his own stories and this one is his no matter who reports it. Even now some Republicans are telling him to knock it off. His claim of winning the popular vote is also his and presents a real insight to this man's psyche.

As I and others have said elsewhere, the man has a sociopathic personality. So when he does and says these off-the-wall totally obviously ill-founded things...we look at it and wonder "WTF?"

The problem is, we're approaching the illogical in a logical fashion. We're trying to rationalize irrationality.

You can't do that and it hurts your head to even try.

[Parihaka]

Who said this

“We are here as the American people to say that we deserve a voting system that we have confidence in. We had a lot of hacking — a lot of hacking in this election and we want to know that our votes have not been hacked.”

;-)

[tbm3fan]

As I and others have said elsewhere, the man has a sociopathic personality. So when he does and says these off-the-wall totally obviously ill-founded things...we look at it and wonder "WTF?"

The problem is, we're approaching the illogical in a logical fashion. We're trying to rationalize irrationality.

You can't do that and it hurts your head to even try.

I'm not sure he is sociopathic just yet. Incredibly narcissistic, yes. An incredible egomaniac, maybe or more likely a fragile ego. I believe he feels entitled to recognition and adoration. So he can ensure that recognition by giving those who voted for him recognition. The more he feeds them in his rhetoric the more he gets in return. Quid pro quo. Not getting that causes him to lash out at the party/parties who deny or would deny him that. Stroke his ego and he is Dr. Jekyll. Do not stroke his ego and he is Mr. Hyde.

[tbm3fan]

Who said this

“We are here as the American people to say that we deserve a voting system that we have confidence in. We had a lot of hacking — a lot of hacking in this election and we want to know that our votes have not been hacked.”

;-)

Stein, who is wasting time. However, if Trump had lost he would say the exact same thing which he did before the election results.

Me, the system is Ok in operation we just need to make sure more people vote who are eligible. Anything else is wasting time...

[InExile]

I'm not sure he is sociopathic just yet. Incredibly narcissistic, yes. An incredible egomaniac, maybe or more likely a fragile ego. I believe he feels entitled to recognition and adoration. So he can ensure that recognition by giving those who voted for him recognition. The more he feeds them in his rhetoric the more he gets in return. Quid pro quo. Not getting that causes him to lash out at the party/parties who deny or would deny him that. Stroke his ego and he is Dr. Jekyll. Do not stroke his ego and he is Mr. Hyde.

Yeah, and right now he is playing the game with Romney, Hillary, Paul Ryan and Jill Stein

In a couple of months it will be with Putin, Xi Jinping, Khamenei and Kim Jong Un. Interesting times

[DOR]

bonehead,

DOR there simply is too many loopholes for non citizens to sneak in and vote as well as fraudulant votes.

Isn’t it amazing that only a handful out of the past billion votes cast were fraudulent? Anyone know what the ROI is of investigating something with that kind of impact? And, how does that miniscule alleged impact compare with denying the rights of millions of legitimate voters, year after year?

We all know voter suppression happens. We all know that purging the polls has nothing to do with crossing off the names of the dead. And, we all know voter fraud is vanishingly small, so don’t bother to deny it.


= = = = =

Dazed,

I’m not sure where I stand on California’s top two voting structure. On the one hand, it puts the two most popular candidates head-to-head, which is a good thing. It doesn’t really matter if they both represent the same party, since no one from another party has managed to win enough primary support (and, the GOP isn’t entitled to a spot on anyone’s ballot; it has to be earned). But, I would prefer a system that did away with the primaries altogether, and just had every name that wanted to be considered for the job.


= = = = =

There was "serious voter fraud" in California.
— Donald Trump on Sunday, November 27th, 2016 in a tweet.

Pants On Fire for Trump's claim about 'serious voter fraud' in California
http://www.politifact.com/california...nia-voter-fra/

Donald Trump alleges widespread voter fraud in California. There's no evidence to back it up
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-p...127-story.html

Donald Trump still has no proof 'millions' of illegal votes happened
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...htmlstory.html


In foreign policy, I believe this kind of thing would be called a "Tonkin Gulf" ... or maybe a "WMD claim"

[tantalus]

As I and others have said elsewhere, the man has a sociopathic personality. So when he does and says these off-the-wall totally obviously ill-founded things...we look at it and wonder "WTF?"

The problem is, we're approaching the illogical in a logical fashion. We're trying to rationalize irrationality.

You can't do that and it hurts your head to even try.

Oh so true. It provides a rather tricky scenario. How will we cope if we don't take Trump literally for the next four years. Everyone is going to have to find some kind of useful balancing act or a colossal amount of cheap digital space and valuable time are going to be expended. On both sides. The Trump defender is going to get fairly exhausted at defending his most recent bizarre statement or become exhausted at finding some equivalent democrat crime and the critic is pursuing a near equally fruitless venture, I do appreciate the need for standards and accountability. The blog posted up by GV Champ may have nailed Trump on one count although it was being applied to his racist or alleged racist comments but has it has wider interpretive value.

16. But didn’t Trump…

Whatever bizarre, divisive, ill-advised, and revolting thing you’re about to mention, the answer is probably yes.

This is equally true on race-related and non-race-related issues. People ask “How could Trump believe the wacky conspiracy theory that Obama was born in Kenya, if he wasn’t racist?” I don’t know. How could Trump believe the wacky conspiracy theory that vaccines cause autism? How could Trump believe the wacky conspiracy theory that the Clintons killed Vince Foster? How could Trump believe the wacky conspiracy theory that Ted Cruz’s father shot JFK?

Trump will apparently believe anything for any reason, especially about his political opponents. If Clinton had been black but Obama white, we’d be hearing that the Vince Foster conspiracy theory proves Trump’s bigotry, and the birtherism was just harmless wackiness.

Likewise, how could Trump insult a Mexican judge just for being Mexican? I don’t know. How could Trump insult a disabled reporter just for being disabled? How could Trump insult John McCain just for being a beloved war hero? Every single person who’s opposed him, Trump has insulted in various offensive ways, including 140 separate incidents of him calling someone “dopey” or “dummy” on Twitter, and you expect him to hold his mouth just because the guy is a Mexican?

I don’t think people appreciate how weird this guy is. His weird way of speaking. His catchphrases like “haters and losers!” or “Sad!”. His tendency to avoid perfectly reasonable questions in favor of meandering tangents about Mar-a-Lago. The ability to bait him into saying basically anything just by telling him people who don’t like him think he shouldn’t.

If you insist that Trump would have to be racist to say or do whatever awful thing he just said or did, you are giving him too much credit. Trump is just randomly and bizarrely terrible. Sometimes his random and bizarre terribleness is about white people, and then we laugh it off. Sometimes it’s about minorities, and then we interpret it as racism.

http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/11/16...l-crying-wolf/
Better get used to it fast or quit your job to keep up with the internet traffic on the latest What Trump said...

[tbm3fan]

The Chief Troll was on Twitter again.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/29/politi...sal/index.html

For someone who won why does he seem at times to be a sore loser??? No, that is not a serious question

[astralis]

i believe it's simple misdirection. getting a lot of media about conflict of interest issues? hey presto, let's wage a culture war and rile up my side. it's exactly the same thing with the Hamilton incident.

[GVChamp]

That's giving Trump way too much credit. He shouted about illegal fraud voting because the newspaper headlines came out saying Hillary Clinton is joining the recount effort. He complained about the protestors the day after he was elected, too: there wasn't any news story about conflict of interest at the time.

There isn't much "wag the dog," more lashing out at whoever ticks him off.

Much better than discussions about how anti-gun our next Supreme Court justice will be or exactly how much money and authority Progressive Pol Pots need to rectify the inherent racism of America, not to mention poverty, oh and saving Obama-care.

[tbm3fan]

i believe it's simple misdirection. getting a lot of media about conflict of interest issues? hey presto, let's wage a culture war and rile up my side. it's exactly the same thing with the Hamilton incident.

More than likely. I can think of one issue where they would need misdirection and that is Ryan's plan to repeal the Affordable Care Act and at the same time talk about ending Medicare by giving seniors vouchers for buying on their own. The man is clueless about real costs. One could call that the Senior Unaffordable Care Act. I love the fact that this guy is guaranteed health care for life with taxpayers paying for it.

[JRT]

Here’s a short list of people who still support Donald Trump:

Rudy Giuliani
Paul Ryan
Mike Pence
Mitch McConnell
Newt Gingrich
Sarah Palin
Reince Priebus
Jeff Sessions (AL)
Mike Rogers (AL)
Mo Brooks (AL)
Steve King (IA)
Thomas Massie (KY)
Ann Coulter
Jerry Falwell Jr
The National Enquirer

Did you happen to see this one?

Falwell says he turned down Trump Cabinet position

By Jesse Byrnes
11/26/16
The Hill

Liberty University President Jerry Falwell Jr. said Saturday that President-elect Donald Trump offered him the position of Education Secretary, but he turned it down.

Falwell reportedly told The Associated Press that Trump offered him the job last week in New York but that he declined it for personal reasons.

Trump wanted a four to six year commitment for the position, but Falwell said he could not leave his school for more than two years to work in a Cabinet job. Falwell also didn't want to move his family, including his teenage daughter, according to the AP.

Trump announced Wednesday his pick of GOP donor and school choice advocate Betsy DeVos to serve as Education secretary. Falwell called DeVos an "excellent choice."

The Liberty University president was an early backer of Trump, endorsing his outsider campaign in January as Trump sought to shore up support among evangelical voters.

Falwell at times caught flak for supporting the New York businessman, including from a member of the university's board and students at the evangelical school in Lynchburg, Va.

.

Elisabeth "Betsy" DeVos (nee Prince) is a daughter of Edgar Prince, who founded the Prince Corporation, which was sold for $1.35B in 1996.

Betsy's brother Erik Prince is a former CEO of Blackwater, the private American military company and security consulting firm formerly called Blackwater Worldwide, renamed "Xe Services" in 2009, and "Academi" in 2011.

Betsy's husband Dick DeVos is a son of Amway founder Richard DeVos.

.

[bonehead]

DOR
"Isn’t it amazing that only a handful out of the past billion votes cast were fraudulent? Anyone know what the ROI is of investigating something with that kind of impact? And, how does that miniscule alleged impact compare with denying the rights of millions of legitimate voters, year after year?"


Really? a handfull? I know a "handfull" im my county alone. After a 20 sec search but I can find a lot more examples.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/how...ion-12824.html
https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2...-15-Merged.pdf
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybens...in-la-n2168330

Close elections definately have been tilted by voting fraud and that is the most undemocratic thing imaginable. Remember in 2000 and Bush won Florida by about 500 votes? That meant the election, so yeah...voting fraud is a big issue. Out of millions of ballets cast in the state it only would take a few hundred to change everything. The future of the country is a great ROI yet only the really sloppy ones get caught. Millions of legitimate voters every year get denied? I dont think so. Perhaps a handful get stung. The rest were simply too lazy to do what it took to register properly. Now keep in mind that only a third of the population even bothered to vote. They didnt bother, they didnt care, but they squeal like pigs when the election didnt go...."their way". Your presumoptioin that millions are being denied their right to vote just isnt accurate.

Everybody who drives needs to carry their license as an I.D. Those that refuse or dont get their licenses are not being denied anything. Just walking down the street and not having any ID can get you into hot water. It is usual to show multiple forms of I.D.s to get a job. No ID....no job. People can get jobs if they want and they can get a driver's lisence if they want so how can you not understand the importance of showing an ID to vote when said vote can change the tack of local and/or national politics? Now take a peak at this: http://www.wnd.com/2000/11/4618/ If you can focus on the part where the democrats targeted hispanics/illegals and add that to the state law that is illegle to ask for an ID at the polls. That is a perfect storm for voter fraud. People with a HUGE incentive to vote for Hillary while the state looks the other way. If you think only a handful took up on this offer I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

[Dazed]

What are you talking about? Stein requested and is paying for the recount.

Trump makes his own stories and this one is his no matter who reports it. Even now some Republicans are telling him to knock it off. His claim of winning the popular vote is also his and presents a real insight to this man's psyche.

Stein is paying for the recount from donations. http://time.com/money/4584102/jill-s...-pennsylvania/

"She’s within striking distance of her goal of $7 million and has far exceeded the $3.5 million she raised during her presidential campaign.

Stein claims that the voting process was hampered by “cyber hacking,” though she has not provided any evidence to back up her claims. A recount would be unlikely to benefit Stein—who did not win a single state in the election—directly. However, one law professor told the Associated Press that her effort could help her build a larger donor list that she could use if she ever decided to run again. Stein says any excess money she raises for the recount effort will then be donated to a charity or a political party."

From her website http://www.jill2016.com/about "Dr. Jill Stein was the Green Party’s 2012 candidate for President. She holds the current record for most votes ever received by a woman candidate for President of the United States in the general election." What with Trump's claims did Hillary place third?

[DOR]

bonehead,

A comprehensive investigation of voter impersonation finds 31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast (Aug 2014)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.a4a9486f555b

The Success of the Voter Fraud Myth (Sept 2016)
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/20/op...myth.html?_r=0

By the Numbers: Voter Fraud (Oct 2016)
http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonwe...rs-voter-fraud

Number of voter fraud cases since 2000: 44 cases out of 1 billion votes cast
(8 of which involve more than one ballot affected). Rate: 0.0000044%.

2012 voter turnout: 129,085,403. Number of voter fraud cases: 4.


Then, there’s the oft-rebuked story based on 22 (!) survey responses: A new study by two Old Dominion University professors, based on survey data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, found that 6.4% of all noncitizens voted illegally.

Pure hogwash.