He knows he lost but
And no, he’s not going to stop.
I saw a segment on the BBC last night talking to Trump fans in the South, who regurgitated all these lies about fake ballots yadda yadda. It was unnerving.
Tip Jar
And no, he’s not going to stop.
I saw a segment on the BBC last night talking to Trump fans in the South, who regurgitated all these lies about fake ballots yadda yadda. It was unnerving.
A little comic relief. Rudi’s latest press conference was held in a more appropriate place this time but he still managed to end up looking foolish. Rudi was sweating so much because of the heat of so many lights inside the RNC headquarters that his hair dye was running down the side of his face. It looked as though his head had sprung an oil leak.
To add insult to injury, his own team have so much respect for him that…
Twenty grand a day, FFS.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/rudy-giuliani-hair-dye-sweat-trump-b1750510.html
‘Trump told ally he knows he lost, but getting back at Dems for questioning legitimacy of his 2016 win’ Because that’s so normal in people over five years old. As we’ve said over and over, I think we’ve all stopped being shocked by the behaviour of the goddamn President of the United States, but can’t help continuing to be shocked at the people, both in influential positions and in millions of homes across the US, that accept this as normal and continue to enable it.
I have been thinking back to that time… Some local idiots thought Jill Stein’s recount would magically do something and I don’t really recall anyone thinking his win was legitimate (myself included), many of whom wanted Obama to overturn the results. Ultimately I figured it would be more bad than good.
The election was “hacked” by Russian trolls an honour before reason FBI director, Republican Senate, etc… But ultimately he’s no one’s fault but the voters whose votes were counted. How different was the attitude amongst lefties? I’m not really sure…
Blood Knight,
“Legitimate” is a tricky word — it means a lot of different things to different people. Regardless of how political scientists might define it, the average voter might mean any of the following:
1. “I understand that it is the will of the people that X is going to be president, and under our system he’s entitled to assume the office, but I consider him unworthy and therefore don’t personally think he is a ‘real’ president.”
2. “I understand that X ‘won’ the election under the rules in place (the Electoral College), and under our system he’s entitled to assume the office, but I consider those rules anti-democratic and therefore don’t consider him to be a legitimate reflection of the will of the people.”
3. “I understand that it is the will of the people that X is going to be president, and under our system he’s entitled to assume the office, but I think the voters were influenced by improper and/or criminal acts that mean he doesn’t fairly reflect the will of the people.”
4. “I understand that X is going to be president, and under our system he’s entitled to assume the office, but I think there was some voter fraud (or voter intimidation or vote suppression) that draw into question whether or not the result actually reflects the will of the people.”
5. “I don’t think that X is entitled to assume the office of president and think that courts and other institutions should not allow him to do so.”
There are slight differences among 1-4, but a huge difference when you get to 5. That’s why I question some of the recent polling about what percentage of Trump voters consider Biden “illegitimate.” There’s a big difference. I think very few Democratic voters were in #5 in 2016, and no elected official that I can remember.
In terms of how Democrats reacted, you can also compare to 2004, where some Democratic supporters circulated theories about Diebold voting machines “stealing” Ohio for Bush, etc.
But in both 2004 and 2016, actual Democratic officeholders didn’t go around saying that Bush or Trump should not be inaugurated, transition funds should be denied, etc. etc. Kerry and Clinton both conceded promptly.
This is a recurring pattern — Democrats reject their conspiracy-minded supporters, while the GOP not only embraces them, it elects them to office. (Compare how Van Jones had to resign from an Obama admin position because of his associations with 9/11 Truthers, while the GOP is going to have a Q Anon lunatic in the House.)
Screechy, #5 fits in with some of the things I’ve noticed about Republicans. They are not able to think any Democrat is legitimate. They believe that Democrats are unfit to govern, that they will mess things up, and that they aren’t real Americans at all. Most of us believe that Republicans are (often, perhaps mostly) unfit to govern, will mess things up, etc, but not that the very idea of Republicans being in power is not legitimate. We don’t like it, but we know that the voters as a whole get to choose.
The idea that there is something not even American about Democrats, and that they are somehow Satanists that will sacrifice goats in the White House and kill babies for fun is widespread. I saw a hay bale this afternoon with a Biden sign. The sign said “Biden supports [something]”. I couldn’t see what [something] was because someone spray painted “Pedos” over [something]. If you really believe things like this, you are going to think they are not legitimate, not necessarily in the way of not being legitimately elected, or of being elected in spite of the will of the people, but not legitimate because evil.
A lot of Trump voters feel as scared about Biden taking the Presidency as we do about Trump. I wish I could feel sorry for them, but I cannot. They are scared that there will be taco trucks on every corner (bring ’em on!), that black men will not be shot by cops, that women will insist on going out and doing things they want to do, that there will be abortion on demand (bring it on…why not?)). Most of us actually see these as good things, but they do not, and they want to destroy…not just vote out, but utterly destroy…those who disagree with them.This is not a point of view I can feel sorry for, or “understand”, or “reach out to”, or “listen” to. And those who urge those things would never put it as bluntly as I have; they sugarcoat it with “they feel disenfranchised” (translation: they don’t like that sometimes the person they don’t want gets elected). They feel “like there concerns aren’t being listened to” (translation: people keep on doing their own thing without changing to suit the regressive “morals” of the poor white male middle).
I’ve said it before: I will not understand (I already understand too much; I grew up in a family full of Trumpistas, and live in a town crawling with them). I will not reach out (put a hand out to them, they’ll bite it off). I will not listen. I’ve listened enough. It’s time for the pundits to listen to what these deplorables are really saying, and realize that they actually do believe it.
[…] a comment by Screechy Monkey on He knows he lost […]
iknklast,
Yep, very good point.
@Screechy #4 – that’s a useful way of breaking down the term “legitimate” and I am glad that this way of regarding the party you detest being in power is not current in the UK. Our UK electoral system is unfair, and in the past the winner of the popular vote has been outweighed by the First Past the Post system, but nobody thinks that the government is not “legitimate” as in #2.
Referendums are another matter, both the Scottish one and the Brexit one, which is one reason why they’re so poisonous. There were masses of conspiracy theories around the Scottish one, and Brexit has been heavily contested under #3. That kind of huge constitutional change should really be by a 2/3 majority, not slivers, however it would be politically impossible to get that measure put through.
Actually the “not legitimate” Prime Minister crept in when eg Johnson took over after Theresa May’s resignation, and she took over after Cameron’s. The UK is not a Presidential system – the Prime Minister is the leader of the party in power and this was perfectly fine, but the idea of a President person that is voted in by the electorate rather than the party has taken root.