Wow, sadly this blew up with the Trumpers and your hypothesis of tribal signaling was lost.
I think that not only lying but also vandalism can be a form of tribal signaling. In my country and in Latin America more broadly, vandalization of public monuments has become a common form of protests by feminists, and it always brings many detractors in the general population. Possibly most of the population disagrees with it.
This is always done with the intent of revealing the "hypocrisy" of the public. But I think that the real explanation is this form of tribal signaling.
I want to say that I'm not above tribes and signaling: Humans are social animals, and we're all just humans.
I really like this last paragraph but one problem I do see is that as the economy got better and better under Obama they tried to respond to right wing criticism by saying it’s getting better but it’s not as good as it could be yet or other statements like that. It’s part of the asymmetry of honesty/lies that has become increasingly problematic for the Democratic Party. Hillary paid a price for being honest with coal miners and trump paid no price for lying though I think Trump lost in great part because he lied so much and so big that they were people willing to abandon him, but it’s clear that so many smaller lies do not hurt the republican party. I think your next blog should develop the idea of the WeAre a Gang mentality. Because I think people really vote for things like which restaurant you’re going to eat at and whether you should wear a mask. Unless someone makes clear to them that these things aren’t solved by voting for a politician, it’s gonna be hard to win over some of these kinds of voters. I have always secretly believed That a big part of Obama’s success was his embrace of sports and things like making picks for basketball that put him front and center on ESPN and other places where people who don’t pay a lot of attention to politics could see him and realize hey this is a good guy
FYI, many conservatives hate ESPN because they feel it's bombarded them with left wing political views, so I'm not sure seing Obama making picks did anything to make them feel like he was a "good guy".
Fantastically significant and noteworthy piece. Metaphorically, "signaling" is the GOP's Facebook account suddenly over-posting about at-cost deals on Ray-Ban sunglasses, and all their followers click on those ads.
Clearly, that page got hacked and now bad apps have proliferated to all their followers.
Will you please go through this same process with the lies told by Adam Schiff? I believe he made many many statements that he had evidence of collusion with Russia. Too bad it ended up that the testimonies that were done behind closed doors did not support his assertions. This happens on both sides, so please try to be honest with yourself and your readers.
According to the mueller report the Russians spent $1.25 millions per month (over the course of the campaign?) and with this effort changed the outcome of a US presidential election. Michael Bloomberg spent somewhere north of $500 million and won two delegates from American Samoa.
But Schiff said he had proof that Trump colluded, not that Russia tried to influence (which all countries do) the election. Two very different statements.
Is anyone who is concerned about the integrity of this election a "nut-job"? Putting aside the rather juvenile ad hominem, don't we need to deal with both the reality and the perception of reality?
First, isn't it important that (apart from the most rabid left- and right-wingers) we emerge from this having our citizens trust the results of this election? As a Trump supporter, I can honestly say that I would rather see Biden win in an election that we perceive as legitimate than Trump win in an election that we believe is tainted.
Second, there are ample, legitimate reasons for concern about this election. I'm sure you're all well aware of these, so I won't recount them here. I will say, though, that I feel confident that those on the left will not begrudge Trump's decision to follow Hillary's advice to Biden (do not concede under any circumstances); although, as you will see, if the legal avenues are exhausted, Trump will freely transition out of office.
No, we're not aware of them, because basically everyone who is in a position to know if such chicanery was going on has said there's no evidence of it. Zero. There was a bit of the usual fraud going on--much of it in Trump's favor. Nothing that could have swung the results enough to change the outcome.
So why would you say that we all know this, when even Republicans who have much to lose by saying this--who have been attacked and threatened for doing so--have gone ahead and said it didn't happen? Why would they do that? Because it's the truth. There was not the slightest evidence of fraud that could give Joe Biden over seven million more votes than Trump, and no candidate has ever lost by that number and won the Presidency.
I once had a college acquaintance tell me that the only one who could defeat Jimmy Carter for reelection would be "The other J.C." That's how sure he was. I had people telling me for years after that they couldn't understand how Reagan was President, since nobody they knew voted for him. This is nothing new. But I never questioned Reagan's victory, and while I had some doubts about Putin's involvement--and about Republicans once again having won the electoral college without winning the popular vote--I didn't spend the last four years saying Trump never really won the election.
I advise you not to waste your time. Biden won a larger percentage of the popular vote than Reagan did in 1980. It's over. Trump lost.
Yes, it’s shocking that the most unpopular incumbent in history lost in the middle of a pandemic and recession. If you’re looking for malfeasance, the question should be how did Trump get so many votes?
The question I would ask is, what leads you to believe the election was tainted? Who, with access to the votes, has actually said they see evidence of fraud? What evidence of fraud has been argued to a judge and deemed to have merit? What law enforcement agency has announced investigations into any kind of irregularity.
The bottom line is, while isolated individuals committing fraud (or unintentionally violating election laws) absolutely happen, the idea that the election was "riddled with fraud" is, itself, outright fraud.
Trump is on record saying "there is no way Biden got 80 million votes." That's just lunacy. To suggest otherwise is to suspend all rational belief.
The "Sagan standard" requires that extraordinary claims be supported by extraordinary evidence. The claims are undoubtedly extraordinary. Where is the evidence?
the continually repeated argument about 4 big "vote dumps" primarily for Biden is such a joke.
absentee ballots in many states could not start being counted until election day morning, and then when it was done, the absentee counting was done with observers from both parties at the local precinct.
This counting was being done around the clock, and obviously a few large precincts finished and updated their state ledgers late at night.
Big city absentee ballots were definitely going to be hugely skewed towards Biden, since big cities have a much higher percentage of democrats, and republicans were discouraged from absentee voting.
When paper recount of these actual ballots is has been done, the numbers have been verified.
The whole bogus claim of fake votes thru "vote dumping" is simply ridiculous.
I understand the position you are taking with respect to this election. However, are you saying that if a significant number of people have provided affidavits stating that they personally witnessed activities that might have changed the outcome in a particular jurisdiction, you do not believe that such allegations should be thoroughly investigated?
Also, what, specifically, are you alleging is incorrect with respect to the vote analysis that Mike linked. That analysis, itself, provides substantial grounds for taking a much closer look. If you disagree, please provide your refutation of that analysis. If you cannot refute it, then why would you oppose investigating this matter?
I go back to my original (unanswered) question: "...[I]sn't it important that (apart from the most rabid left- and right-wingers) we emerge from this having our citizens trust the results of this election?
And anyone who looks objectively at the procedures and audits in place will see that there is no significant evidence of malfeasance or fraud. Any objective person. Having looked at this and saying we haven’t done enough tells me that we can never do enough to satisfy those with a vested interest in believing (or pretending to believe) that our election system is rife with fraud. If you’ve looked at the election and the evidence and don’t trust the results, there is no further analysis that will get you there—you’ll just find further doubt or conspiracy no matter how meritless. Pursuing “fraud” at this point is not serious.
Ignoring that the standard bearer on the right is objectively a pathological liar...
The court cases, and judge’s (many appointed by Trump!) specific rulings/dismissals have made it abundantly clear to anyone not a “rabid right winger” to quote you, that there wasn’t any systemic fraud in this election. You’re trying to come off as some rationale moderate by decrying “rabid right and left wingers” when the reality is we have a rabid right trying to steal an election with ZERO evidence.
You don't answer a single question. You (seemingly) haven't a clue about how evidence works. Worse, you are obviously completely unconcerned whether or not any actual misconduct occurred in this election (but, no doubt, you spent the past few years enraged at Trump's "collusion" with Russia, yes?).
Despite all that, you are somehow convinced that the "rabid right" is out to "steal" this election. Given the evidently tender reverence with which you hold "evidence", please provide some for your claim...
1) Biden, an uncharismatic politicians got more than 80 million votes. It's wonderful, but no "evidence" of voter fraud. That's literally saying: "He couldn't have possibly won because I don't think that he could've won".
4) "Biden Won Despite Democrat Losses Everywhere Else". This is basically evidence that Americans voted against Trump more than against the GOP, not of fraud.
“ A ballot printing mishap and a mix of court rulings prompted Allegheny County to stop counting 2020 election ballots on Thursday to complete “administrative tasks.”
The news that Pennsylvania’s second biggest county would pause for a day with the race between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden hanging in the balance caused a social media uproar.
I can't speak to the details of why some periodic updated vote totals showed Trump's votes decreasing in PA. and GA., but I do know that a hand recount of the paper ballots in GA. Showed no essential discrepancy in vote totals and no fraudulent activity. There could be several explanations for these anomalies, and the bottom line is that the counting of the paper ballots showed no fraud occurred. This is exactly why nearly all states now require backup paper ballots.
4 "extreme" biden vote "dumps" are exactly what we expect when the majority of Biden votes are focused on the cities. Do the same for the past elections.
The evidence is that Trump says it's so, and for four years, his core supporters have refused to accept he's a liar. And like the song says, has been so all his life.
Jeff, I read your first sentence and did not need to read anymore. What is wrong with these people. I new there was illegal activity before a word was printed by the press. Will the liberals get away with it. Yes, Progressives get everything swept under the carpet.
"Second, there are ample, legitimate reasons for concern about this election."
No, there are not.
Unless you're a third-party voter, in which case, this election, like EVERY election, has seen BOTH REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS do all they can to disenfranchise us.
Provable instances of fraud or illegal vote counting appear unlikely to approach Biden's margin of victory, but the more insidious lie here is on the left--that there is absolutely positively no fraud or irregularities. Someone below pointed to Schiff and the Russia collusion resistance. I vote 3rd party, but media-backed leftist lies, such as the myth that police are racially targeting people for execution, are more dangerous than an obviously boastful blowhard the media and urban bubble-dwellers detest.
Why have so many Democrats and corporate media figures embraced Hillary Clinton's obviously made-up claims of Russian collusion? Rationally, they must know that all of the allegations are lies. Court after court, recount after recount, investigation after investigation has shown zero evidence of collusion. Yet the more the evidence against Clinton's lies piles up, the more figures on the left line up to publicly embrace the fiction.
Trump's campaign manager was convicted of acting as an unregistered foreign on behalf of a Russian puppet government in Ukraine, even the Republican led senate intelligence committee admitted that he was working in close contact with Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian intelligence agent. Perhaps Trump was ignorant of Manafort's schemes, but that's far from obvious.
I dunno. I'm less interested in this topic -- which seems about elite signaling -- than why the democratic party can't seem to find a way to choose policy issues that are winners for the median rust belt voter. It seems like US policy has kinda decided to just shrug its shoulders on investing in 40 million or so people in Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, W. Pa, and Upstate NY, and that seems like one of the stupidest possible decisions that could be made. If they aren't investing in those people and regions, they might as well just admit that they're prefer a Chinese hegemony where the rich in the US stay the rich.
I’m reading your article thinking you are missing the the real answer, but then u mention Rich Lowry.
As your token flyover country immersed with Trump voters, it absolutely is a big middle finger.
The polls say a huge percentage of people believe in the stolen election thing... or at least say it... but... where are the mass marches? There isn’t any (except for small gatherings of crockpots). They don’t really believe it... they just want to believe it, or more likely just want to be edgy and difficult. It’s all BS. In the real world, these Trump voters have moved on. I bet ratings are down on Fox already.
Have you seen the affidavits? Have you seen the evidence brought forth by Lin Wood? The media mocks everything that comes up without consideration and then repeats, no evidence.
One of the things I liked about Scott Alexander’s blog was that when he set out his claims he always linked to evidence. So I think your article would be improved a lot if eg you’d link to the right wing media types who have been supporting the claims. I’d sure like to know if they are more or less respectable types or the nutjob wing.
I think a here here here and here approach is good. I didn’t mean to say it isn’t happening. Also if some (Tucker Carlson? Ben Shapiro?) aren’t doing this then that’s worth mentioning. (I don’t watch TC and find Shapiro too exhausting to listen to much but they seem the least nutty of the committed conservatives to me). Anyway I just think the more links the stronger the argument and mentioning exceptions helps not hinders. (Though as I say maybe they aren’t exceptions - I don’t pay enough attention and that’s why I need you to tell me!)
My purpose with this post wasn't to claim that this phenomenon is universal, but to attempt to explain why it happens when it does happen! When a lie is embraced by both the chair of the RNC and a major Fox News anchor, I think it's a phenomenon worth exploring. That doesn't mean I'm saying "Everyone on the right is doing this".
As for respectability, I think we have to be careful not to do the "no true Scotsman" thing -- i.e., to assign respectability status only to those who don't indulge Trump's lies, and then claim that no respectable person espouses Trump's lies.
But I do love to provide evidence to back up all my claims, and will continue to strive to do this!
Really Noah? You'll "strive to do this!" and "That doesn't mean I'm saying everyone on the right is doing this."? Why don't you re-read the first paragraph of your own post, where you state, unequivocally, all theories that are opposite of your point of view are wrong. Here, I'll help, quoting you directly:
"Why have so many Republicans and right-wing media figures embraced Donald Trump’s obviously made-up claims of voter fraud? Rationally, they must know that all of the allegations are lies. Court after court, recount after recount, investigation after investigation has shown zero evidence of fraud. Yet the more the evidence against Trump’s lies piles up, the more figures on the right line up to publicly embrace the fiction."
You wrote, "all ... allegations are lies". "...zero evidence of fraud." All, never, zero" ... absolutist words that YOU chose to use but whose meanings are provably false as all allegations are NOT lies, and there is clear evidence of voter fraud. You also state that "his claims are obviously made up." Pray tell, oh wise one, exactly which claims are made up? All of them? One of them? Several of them? Powerful pronouncements certainly, little to no back up absolutely.
Your very first paragraph refutes entirely your comment to Russell above. You write a post in absolute terms, yet you argue in a comment section that, "I do love to provide evidence to back up all my claims, and will continue to strive to do this!"
There was no striving in your post, are you going to start "striving" now?
Why does the left media lick Biden's boot? Did you ever notice that? I'm guessing no. Isn't it the job of the media to ask questions? Why do they lob up softballs? Because they are partisan and unfair and they wanted Biden to win. The left media conspired to elect Biden by hook or by crook. It's obvious.
I would like to see you evidence to back up your claims. For example, there are articles and video available of a Dominion senior representative in 2019 demonstrating how the voting machines can be manipulated. Have you looked at those analyzed his presentation and stated how he was wrong? When the president of Dominion was interviewed and stated that the machines could not be hacked was he confronted with the 2019 video and asked to explain the disconnect. Has anyone interviewed Elizabeth Warren and asked her to explain what was done between her 2019 concerns with the machines and the 2020 elections? How about the stories of the boarding up of the area where vote counting was done as demonstrated by pictures widely available. Have you bothered to interview the election supervisor and asked why that was necessary? If so what was the answer? If not why not? What about the water leak in the Atlanta vote counting center that was purported to have delayed counting on election day, but the leak has never been explained and no work order/activity to support the major leak has been found? Are you not mildly curious about the video showing how CNN's own display of election results on election night showed a decrease in the total votes for trump over a five minute period? What is the explanation and reason that total votes should ever decrease? I would like to see this type of reporting done vice just saying that these are unfounded claims.
Wow, sadly this blew up with the Trumpers and your hypothesis of tribal signaling was lost.
I think that not only lying but also vandalism can be a form of tribal signaling. In my country and in Latin America more broadly, vandalization of public monuments has become a common form of protests by feminists, and it always brings many detractors in the general population. Possibly most of the population disagrees with it.
This is always done with the intent of revealing the "hypocrisy" of the public. But I think that the real explanation is this form of tribal signaling.
I want to say that I'm not above tribes and signaling: Humans are social animals, and we're all just humans.
I really like this last paragraph but one problem I do see is that as the economy got better and better under Obama they tried to respond to right wing criticism by saying it’s getting better but it’s not as good as it could be yet or other statements like that. It’s part of the asymmetry of honesty/lies that has become increasingly problematic for the Democratic Party. Hillary paid a price for being honest with coal miners and trump paid no price for lying though I think Trump lost in great part because he lied so much and so big that they were people willing to abandon him, but it’s clear that so many smaller lies do not hurt the republican party. I think your next blog should develop the idea of the WeAre a Gang mentality. Because I think people really vote for things like which restaurant you’re going to eat at and whether you should wear a mask. Unless someone makes clear to them that these things aren’t solved by voting for a politician, it’s gonna be hard to win over some of these kinds of voters. I have always secretly believed That a big part of Obama’s success was his embrace of sports and things like making picks for basketball that put him front and center on ESPN and other places where people who don’t pay a lot of attention to politics could see him and realize hey this is a good guy
FYI, many conservatives hate ESPN because they feel it's bombarded them with left wing political views, so I'm not sure seing Obama making picks did anything to make them feel like he was a "good guy".
Fantastically significant and noteworthy piece. Metaphorically, "signaling" is the GOP's Facebook account suddenly over-posting about at-cost deals on Ray-Ban sunglasses, and all their followers click on those ads.
Clearly, that page got hacked and now bad apps have proliferated to all their followers.
Will you please go through this same process with the lies told by Adam Schiff? I believe he made many many statements that he had evidence of collusion with Russia. Too bad it ended up that the testimonies that were done behind closed doors did not support his assertions. This happens on both sides, so please try to be honest with yourself and your readers.
There is some doubt as to whether Trump directly colluded with Russia, but there is no doubt at all Putin intervened in both elections.
Less effectively this time, but you know, fool me once.....
According to the mueller report the Russians spent $1.25 millions per month (over the course of the campaign?) and with this effort changed the outcome of a US presidential election. Michael Bloomberg spent somewhere north of $500 million and won two delegates from American Samoa.
But Schiff said he had proof that Trump colluded, not that Russia tried to influence (which all countries do) the election. Two very different statements.
Is anyone who is concerned about the integrity of this election a "nut-job"? Putting aside the rather juvenile ad hominem, don't we need to deal with both the reality and the perception of reality?
First, isn't it important that (apart from the most rabid left- and right-wingers) we emerge from this having our citizens trust the results of this election? As a Trump supporter, I can honestly say that I would rather see Biden win in an election that we perceive as legitimate than Trump win in an election that we believe is tainted.
Second, there are ample, legitimate reasons for concern about this election. I'm sure you're all well aware of these, so I won't recount them here. I will say, though, that I feel confident that those on the left will not begrudge Trump's decision to follow Hillary's advice to Biden (do not concede under any circumstances); although, as you will see, if the legal avenues are exhausted, Trump will freely transition out of office.
No, we're not aware of them, because basically everyone who is in a position to know if such chicanery was going on has said there's no evidence of it. Zero. There was a bit of the usual fraud going on--much of it in Trump's favor. Nothing that could have swung the results enough to change the outcome.
So why would you say that we all know this, when even Republicans who have much to lose by saying this--who have been attacked and threatened for doing so--have gone ahead and said it didn't happen? Why would they do that? Because it's the truth. There was not the slightest evidence of fraud that could give Joe Biden over seven million more votes than Trump, and no candidate has ever lost by that number and won the Presidency.
I once had a college acquaintance tell me that the only one who could defeat Jimmy Carter for reelection would be "The other J.C." That's how sure he was. I had people telling me for years after that they couldn't understand how Reagan was President, since nobody they knew voted for him. This is nothing new. But I never questioned Reagan's victory, and while I had some doubts about Putin's involvement--and about Republicans once again having won the electoral college without winning the popular vote--I didn't spend the last four years saying Trump never really won the election.
I advise you not to waste your time. Biden won a larger percentage of the popular vote than Reagan did in 1980. It's over. Trump lost.
Yes, it’s shocking that the most unpopular incumbent in history lost in the middle of a pandemic and recession. If you’re looking for malfeasance, the question should be how did Trump get so many votes?
The question I would ask is, what leads you to believe the election was tainted? Who, with access to the votes, has actually said they see evidence of fraud? What evidence of fraud has been argued to a judge and deemed to have merit? What law enforcement agency has announced investigations into any kind of irregularity.
The bottom line is, while isolated individuals committing fraud (or unintentionally violating election laws) absolutely happen, the idea that the election was "riddled with fraud" is, itself, outright fraud.
Trump is on record saying "there is no way Biden got 80 million votes." That's just lunacy. To suggest otherwise is to suspend all rational belief.
The "Sagan standard" requires that extraordinary claims be supported by extraordinary evidence. The claims are undoubtedly extraordinary. Where is the evidence?
How about this ...
https://votepatternanalysis.substack.com/p/voting-anomalies-2020
the continually repeated argument about 4 big "vote dumps" primarily for Biden is such a joke.
absentee ballots in many states could not start being counted until election day morning, and then when it was done, the absentee counting was done with observers from both parties at the local precinct.
This counting was being done around the clock, and obviously a few large precincts finished and updated their state ledgers late at night.
Big city absentee ballots were definitely going to be hugely skewed towards Biden, since big cities have a much higher percentage of democrats, and republicans were discouraged from absentee voting.
When paper recount of these actual ballots is has been done, the numbers have been verified.
The whole bogus claim of fake votes thru "vote dumping" is simply ridiculous.
I understand the position you are taking with respect to this election. However, are you saying that if a significant number of people have provided affidavits stating that they personally witnessed activities that might have changed the outcome in a particular jurisdiction, you do not believe that such allegations should be thoroughly investigated?
Also, what, specifically, are you alleging is incorrect with respect to the vote analysis that Mike linked. That analysis, itself, provides substantial grounds for taking a much closer look. If you disagree, please provide your refutation of that analysis. If you cannot refute it, then why would you oppose investigating this matter?
I go back to my original (unanswered) question: "...[I]sn't it important that (apart from the most rabid left- and right-wingers) we emerge from this having our citizens trust the results of this election?
And anyone who looks objectively at the procedures and audits in place will see that there is no significant evidence of malfeasance or fraud. Any objective person. Having looked at this and saying we haven’t done enough tells me that we can never do enough to satisfy those with a vested interest in believing (or pretending to believe) that our election system is rife with fraud. If you’ve looked at the election and the evidence and don’t trust the results, there is no further analysis that will get you there—you’ll just find further doubt or conspiracy no matter how meritless. Pursuing “fraud” at this point is not serious.
Ignoring that the standard bearer on the right is objectively a pathological liar...
The court cases, and judge’s (many appointed by Trump!) specific rulings/dismissals have made it abundantly clear to anyone not a “rabid right winger” to quote you, that there wasn’t any systemic fraud in this election. You’re trying to come off as some rationale moderate by decrying “rabid right and left wingers” when the reality is we have a rabid right trying to steal an election with ZERO evidence.
What a completely unserious response.
You don't answer a single question. You (seemingly) haven't a clue about how evidence works. Worse, you are obviously completely unconcerned whether or not any actual misconduct occurred in this election (but, no doubt, you spent the past few years enraged at Trump's "collusion" with Russia, yes?).
Despite all that, you are somehow convinced that the "rabid right" is out to "steal" this election. Given the evidently tender reverence with which you hold "evidence", please provide some for your claim...
https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/23/5-more-ways-joe-biden-magically-outperformed-election-norms/
Hi
Lol
1) Biden, an uncharismatic politicians got more than 80 million votes. It's wonderful, but no "evidence" of voter fraud. That's literally saying: "He couldn't have possibly won because I don't think that he could've won".
2) So?
3) False: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/20/fact-check-biden-outperformed-clinton-most-major-metro-areas/6349084002/
4) "Biden Won Despite Democrat Losses Everywhere Else". This is basically evidence that Americans voted against Trump more than against the GOP, not of fraud.
The counting was being done around the clock?
Penn live begs to differ with you.
“ A ballot printing mishap and a mix of court rulings prompted Allegheny County to stop counting 2020 election ballots on Thursday to complete “administrative tasks.”
The news that Pennsylvania’s second biggest county would pause for a day with the race between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden hanging in the balance caused a social media uproar.
How about it? It is *exactly* as expected.
(BTW, it is important to note that there will *always* be a small number of hugely weird tallies. That's how probability works--by definition.)
I can't speak to the details of why some periodic updated vote totals showed Trump's votes decreasing in PA. and GA., but I do know that a hand recount of the paper ballots in GA. Showed no essential discrepancy in vote totals and no fraudulent activity. There could be several explanations for these anomalies, and the bottom line is that the counting of the paper ballots showed no fraud occurred. This is exactly why nearly all states now require backup paper ballots.
An anonymous Substack account, started after the election was over and with just two posts? Riiigghhhhttt.
Hi!
4 "extreme" biden vote "dumps" are exactly what we expect when the majority of Biden votes are focused on the cities. Do the same for the past elections.
The evidence is that Trump says it's so, and for four years, his core supporters have refused to accept he's a liar. And like the song says, has been so all his life.
Jeff, I read your first sentence and did not need to read anymore. What is wrong with these people. I new there was illegal activity before a word was printed by the press. Will the liberals get away with it. Yes, Progressives get everything swept under the carpet.
"Second, there are ample, legitimate reasons for concern about this election."
No, there are not.
Unless you're a third-party voter, in which case, this election, like EVERY election, has seen BOTH REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS do all they can to disenfranchise us.
Until you complain about THAT, shut up.
As usual, v good - thx
NYT weighed in on this a few days ago: t.ly/8F6v
Presumably the author will write a similar column discussing the left's claims of Russian collusion and the Kavanaugh accusations.
Provable instances of fraud or illegal vote counting appear unlikely to approach Biden's margin of victory, but the more insidious lie here is on the left--that there is absolutely positively no fraud or irregularities. Someone below pointed to Schiff and the Russia collusion resistance. I vote 3rd party, but media-backed leftist lies, such as the myth that police are racially targeting people for execution, are more dangerous than an obviously boastful blowhard the media and urban bubble-dwellers detest.
"Political lying as tribal signaling".
As evidence, I submit THIS article.
Why have so many Democrats and corporate media figures embraced Hillary Clinton's obviously made-up claims of Russian collusion? Rationally, they must know that all of the allegations are lies. Court after court, recount after recount, investigation after investigation has shown zero evidence of collusion. Yet the more the evidence against Clinton's lies piles up, the more figures on the left line up to publicly embrace the fiction.
Trump's campaign manager was convicted of acting as an unregistered foreign on behalf of a Russian puppet government in Ukraine, even the Republican led senate intelligence committee admitted that he was working in close contact with Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian intelligence agent. Perhaps Trump was ignorant of Manafort's schemes, but that's far from obvious.
I dunno. I'm less interested in this topic -- which seems about elite signaling -- than why the democratic party can't seem to find a way to choose policy issues that are winners for the median rust belt voter. It seems like US policy has kinda decided to just shrug its shoulders on investing in 40 million or so people in Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, W. Pa, and Upstate NY, and that seems like one of the stupidest possible decisions that could be made. If they aren't investing in those people and regions, they might as well just admit that they're prefer a Chinese hegemony where the rich in the US stay the rich.
I’m reading your article thinking you are missing the the real answer, but then u mention Rich Lowry.
As your token flyover country immersed with Trump voters, it absolutely is a big middle finger.
The polls say a huge percentage of people believe in the stolen election thing... or at least say it... but... where are the mass marches? There isn’t any (except for small gatherings of crockpots). They don’t really believe it... they just want to believe it, or more likely just want to be edgy and difficult. It’s all BS. In the real world, these Trump voters have moved on. I bet ratings are down on Fox already.
Trumpers aren’t true believers.
Forgive grammar. On iPhone.
Have you seen the affidavits? Have you seen the evidence brought forth by Lin Wood? The media mocks everything that comes up without consideration and then repeats, no evidence.
Obviously made up? It's not so obviously made up to me.
Lying about President Trump got him impeached, investigated and allowed Biden to win. So it works.
One of the things I liked about Scott Alexander’s blog was that when he set out his claims he always linked to evidence. So I think your article would be improved a lot if eg you’d link to the right wing media types who have been supporting the claims. I’d sure like to know if they are more or less respectable types or the nutjob wing.
I provided a link to Fox News anchor Maria Baritromo supporting Trump's unfounded claims: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1333074474598535169
Are there other right-leaning news outlets you'd consider "more respectable", and not part of the "nutjob wing"?
I think a here here here and here approach is good. I didn’t mean to say it isn’t happening. Also if some (Tucker Carlson? Ben Shapiro?) aren’t doing this then that’s worth mentioning. (I don’t watch TC and find Shapiro too exhausting to listen to much but they seem the least nutty of the committed conservatives to me). Anyway I just think the more links the stronger the argument and mentioning exceptions helps not hinders. (Though as I say maybe they aren’t exceptions - I don’t pay enough attention and that’s why I need you to tell me!)
My purpose with this post wasn't to claim that this phenomenon is universal, but to attempt to explain why it happens when it does happen! When a lie is embraced by both the chair of the RNC and a major Fox News anchor, I think it's a phenomenon worth exploring. That doesn't mean I'm saying "Everyone on the right is doing this".
As for respectability, I think we have to be careful not to do the "no true Scotsman" thing -- i.e., to assign respectability status only to those who don't indulge Trump's lies, and then claim that no respectable person espouses Trump's lies.
But I do love to provide evidence to back up all my claims, and will continue to strive to do this!
Really Noah? You'll "strive to do this!" and "That doesn't mean I'm saying everyone on the right is doing this."? Why don't you re-read the first paragraph of your own post, where you state, unequivocally, all theories that are opposite of your point of view are wrong. Here, I'll help, quoting you directly:
"Why have so many Republicans and right-wing media figures embraced Donald Trump’s obviously made-up claims of voter fraud? Rationally, they must know that all of the allegations are lies. Court after court, recount after recount, investigation after investigation has shown zero evidence of fraud. Yet the more the evidence against Trump’s lies piles up, the more figures on the right line up to publicly embrace the fiction."
You wrote, "all ... allegations are lies". "...zero evidence of fraud." All, never, zero" ... absolutist words that YOU chose to use but whose meanings are provably false as all allegations are NOT lies, and there is clear evidence of voter fraud. You also state that "his claims are obviously made up." Pray tell, oh wise one, exactly which claims are made up? All of them? One of them? Several of them? Powerful pronouncements certainly, little to no back up absolutely.
Your very first paragraph refutes entirely your comment to Russell above. You write a post in absolute terms, yet you argue in a comment section that, "I do love to provide evidence to back up all my claims, and will continue to strive to do this!"
There was no striving in your post, are you going to start "striving" now?
Why does the left media lick Biden's boot? Did you ever notice that? I'm guessing no. Isn't it the job of the media to ask questions? Why do they lob up softballs? Because they are partisan and unfair and they wanted Biden to win. The left media conspired to elect Biden by hook or by crook. It's obvious.
I would like to see you evidence to back up your claims. For example, there are articles and video available of a Dominion senior representative in 2019 demonstrating how the voting machines can be manipulated. Have you looked at those analyzed his presentation and stated how he was wrong? When the president of Dominion was interviewed and stated that the machines could not be hacked was he confronted with the 2019 video and asked to explain the disconnect. Has anyone interviewed Elizabeth Warren and asked her to explain what was done between her 2019 concerns with the machines and the 2020 elections? How about the stories of the boarding up of the area where vote counting was done as demonstrated by pictures widely available. Have you bothered to interview the election supervisor and asked why that was necessary? If so what was the answer? If not why not? What about the water leak in the Atlanta vote counting center that was purported to have delayed counting on election day, but the leak has never been explained and no work order/activity to support the major leak has been found? Are you not mildly curious about the video showing how CNN's own display of election results on election night showed a decrease in the total votes for trump over a five minute period? What is the explanation and reason that total votes should ever decrease? I would like to see this type of reporting done vice just saying that these are unfounded claims.