Summary

Donald Trump and his team are attacking media outlets like Politico and The New York Times for reporting that his 2024 election victory over Kamala Harris was narrow, not a “landslide.”

Trump won by 1.6 points and failed to secure a majority of the popular vote, a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton’s over him in 2016.

Despite these facts, Trump and his allies continue to tout his win as “historic” and “dominant,” aiming to bolster his political mandate amid criticisms that his victory was less decisive than claimed.

    • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      4 days ago

      Wow, that makes more sense in politics than it does in quantum mechanics

      Maybe we can model the quantum world on Politics.

      every time a politician has to make a statement he both agrees and disagrees until he knows who the audience.

  • xenomor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Remember that his first official act as president in his first term was to send Sean Spicer out, literally on day one, to scold the press corp for seeing the paltry crowd at his inauguration. This guy is always, always just small dick energy in an ill-fitting suit.

  • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    I mean if you take into account how stupid and incompetent he was in his last term and that he now he seems to be losing his faculties it was quite a landslide. Getting 10% should have been a miracle.

  • Hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    33
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    There’s even rumors that votes in the swing states were fraudulent as well. A disproportionate number of “bullet ballots” in swing states alone may indicate foul going-ons. The only way to tell would be a recount, however.

    Edit: Seems the info is dubious, at best. Partially straight up wrong. Oh well. A few hours of hope was nice.

      • Trev625@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        I read that earlier and I’m confused why it seems to matter if the vote is above the threshold for the state to flip or not to do a recount.

        Take Nevada: " As for Nevada, Spoonamore contended in his letter, “NV - 43K+ 5.5%+ of Trump’s total vote. Enough to exceed recount threshold.” The Nevada government website (archived) reported that — out of 1,487,887 total ballots cast — 1,484,840 ballots contained votes for presidential candidates and 1,464,728 contained votes for U.S. Senate candidates. The mximum number of “bullet votes” is 23,159. Trump received 46,008 more votes in Nevada than Harris. "

        Snopes seems to be saying that it doesn’t matter if Trump cheated and sneaked in 23k bullet votes because Kamala would have lost anyway without them. In my view, if ANY cheating occured then that’s like really bad right? Even if it didn’t flip the election?

        23k is a little more than half of 43k so the percentage would drop from 5.5% down to 2.8% which is still wayyy over the usual 0.05% bullet ballots which seems very odd and makes it recount worthy. (Note: The 0.05% bullet ballots figure comes from the original article which I haven’t fact checked since idk how so if that’s wrong please correct it “In comparison, bullet ballots for Trump in Oregon, Utah and Idaho—the three states which border Arizona and Nevada, with equally fervent Trump voters—count for less than 0.05% in each state.”)

        • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          5 days ago

          Even ignoring the math, the assertion that a statistically unlikely amount of bullet ballots means there has been fraud is kinda out there. Historically, bullet ballots are fairly common with populist candidates.

          • asteriskeverything@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 days ago

            It does seem to me like a valid reason for a recount though and I believe this shit is being rugswept cuz we don’t wanna look like conspiracy theorists

        • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          I think since the total amount of bullet votes isn’t as massive as previously thought, it may only be somewhat outside of the norm, making the possible fraud less likely.

          I can see where it may be best to be tactical with a demand for recount if it won’t change the outcome, as then it could make it harder to have a recount in the next election to the point where it does change the outcome. That’s just my 2 cents tho.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        5 days ago

        Oh, thanks for that link. They did go really deep into the numbers with this one. I knew the whole Starlink part of the letter made no sense given how the internet works, but I still had questions about the number of bullet ballots, which Snopes addresses as well state by state.

    • nexusband@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      5 days ago

      I think that’s all BS. However, what is not BS is that ballots have just “vanished”, due to being challenged by the Vigilante stuff. According to Greg Pallast, investigative journalist with the BBC, there have been over 800k provisional ballots that have not been counted because they have been thrown out. He even has the exact names of people, who’s ballots have been thrown out.

      If it wasn’t so dire, I’d find it extremely fascinating…

      https://youtu.be/X3hXeEiFcJM

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 days ago

      Problematic for a couple of reasons:

      1. You can’t just insert fake ballots, that would cause the vote count to be incorrect when compared to registered voters.

      2. A bullet ballot would support Trump, but have no impact on other races… races which we know Republicans won.

      Looking at Pennsylvania as an example:

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election_in_Pennsylvania

      Trump - 3,542,505
      Harris - 3,421,088
      Stein - 34,508
      Oliver - 33,299
      Total - 7,031,400
      Trump won by 121,417

      Now compare that to the Senate election:

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_election_in_Pennsylvania

      McCormick - 3,395,785
      Casey - 3,378,356
      Libertarian - 89,475
      Green - 66,185
      Constitution - 23,586
      Total - 6,953,384

      So 78,016 more people voted in the Presidential race than the Senate race, which is not enough to have given Trump the win if they were all bullet ballots.

      • nexusband@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        You don’t have to fake ballots. You can just throw absentee ballots out, after them being challenged…which happens since 2000 (it’s apparently one of the reasons Bush won), this time however there have been over 800k ballots that have been thrown out…in swing states alone.

        Considering the margins are so slim, a few 100k challenged voters here and there…and you have “We don’t need your votes, we have enough” https://youtu.be/X3hXeEiFcJM

        • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 days ago

          That isn’t the claim though. The claim is enough “bullet ballots” (Trump only ballots) had been inserted to flip the election.

          Elections don’t work that way. I was telling people the same thing in 2016 and 2020.

          When people cast a vote, it’s tied to a registration. If you insert a bunch of votes, you end up with more ballots than voters.

          • adarza@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            5 days ago

            counting machines could be compromised and doing an office space thing in targeted areas, flipping one democrat vote for every 10 counted. no one would question it. only a hand count would verify, and those aren’t usually done anymore.

          • Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            So, not to say I necessarily believe in this, but the case laid out has a lot to do with Elon’s PAC, which was collecting only names and addresses with the promise that voters would be paid x amount after taking some sort of pledge. The argument then follows, that if electronic tabulation systems were hacked and continuously connected to the Internet, the people who signed up to his list could have their vote automatically cast as a bullet ballot for Donald Trump. Supposedly, there’s a way they could do this digital ballot stuffing specifically for voters whose ballot had not shown up as cast within the voter registry past a certain point in time, so all the fraudulent ballots look like legitimate ones tied to actual people.

            It’s pretty far-fetched, but just plausible enough that it’s appealing to a lot of people who were blindsided by election day’s results

            • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              Tabulation systems aren’t connected to the internet. Any manipulation has to be done on a machine by machine basis, which can still be done with physical access and USB keys, but doing that at election scale would not go un-noticed.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      Write your senators and representative and ask them to enforce section 3 of the 14th amendment and prevent an insurrectionist from holding office.

  • ThatOneKrazyKaptain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    I mean, no, a Landslide is historically defined as 400 EVs and that hasn’t happened in a while, not even Obama quite got there.

    But it is the biggest victory a Republican has had since 1988. I don’t get all the hemming and hawing about mandates and plurality of PV vs majority of PV and stuff. This was a bigger win for the Republicans then 2000, 2004, and 2016. 2004 is the only one that’s even debatable. Harris lost harder than any democrat since Micheal Dukakis. And while a lot of that is people who only show up for Trump and thus it’s possible 2028 is a democrat wave, there’s also a lot of people specifically turned off by Trump who might not mind the far younger Vance(who had the biggest glowup this year of the 4 people on the tickets, he went from bottom in popularity to comparable to Walz, meanwhile Trump and Walz stagnated and Harris surged and then un-surged)

  • nifty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    4 days ago

    I kinda knew the popular vote thing would correct itself, I think the reason it’s this close at all is because most people don’t pay attention to politics as much as they should

    • SuperSaiyanSwag
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 days ago

      He won popular (more votes than other candidates), he did not win majority (>50% of total votes)

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      5 days ago

      This is the only effective way to slow him down imo. Make fun of him for having small crowds at his rallies then sue him for libel when he says his were bigger. It doesn’t matter if it goes anywhere in court, you just need to force the conversation to keep his attention.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        Unfortunately, he will soon have the power of the federal government at his fingertips. He will begin exacting retribution on anyone who is effective in slowing him down.

      • evatronic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        4 days ago

        I’m not one for conspiracy theories, and we don’t have any evidence to back up any sort of claims of rigging or election fraud. In fact, the various lawsuits Trump initiated in the last cycle and audits and recounts and so on provided a pretty damning pile of evidence for “not rigged”.

        Republicans aren’t rigging elections themselves. There’s no tomfoolery going on with voting machines, or people voting twice, or similar. They’re “rigging” it with legal means – disenfranchising voters, suppressing turnout, financing third party candidates to peel votes away from the other side, gerrymandering districts, and using massive propaganda systems to influence who decides to vote and what they choose when they do vote.

        All said, though, we can always make the system more robust, and increase both voters’ confidence in the system and allay any fears of actual rigging. But election reforms are often a “Democrat” issue, so almost any Republican will oppose meaningful reforms that don’t do one of the things above to suppress voters.

      • BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        There was throwing out and refuse to count mail in ballots with out dates stamped in Pennsylvania. They did have fire bombing of ballot drop off boxes. There was phone calls from Russia. There was a media platform manipulating the news to be right wing.

        While I don’t think it wouldn’t have changed anything Kamala did lose by just over 250k votes in 4 states.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          I don’t get the “it won’t change the outcome” arguments. So the fuck what? If I cheat on an exam, but still fail, does that mean I shouldn’t get in trouble for cheating?

          Or, I guess more accurately: If I was already going to pass an exam, but cheat on it anyway, should I get a pass?

          • BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            Hmm. Is there any political or judicial will to do anything about Trump or right wing people cheating. We need plausible proof to convict people and if we haven’t arrested Trump for election interference from 2020 by now then what is the point of stressing sure some people should try if these is something but nothing is going to come of it.

            The President once elected can still serve even in jail. So yes even if he cheated and we discover something was wrong with election once Kamala conceded Trump won even if she wasn’t mathematically eliminated and it completely turned the tide Trump still would be the next president. I don’t agree with that but yeah. It is as if we discovered someone cheated to get there diploma or degree years after the fact they already got the paper so even if you rescind it to jobs they would still look like a legitimate candidate

  • DogPeePoo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Facts don’t care about his feelings.

    The gaslighting of his campaign knows no bounds.

  • Yeah, well, this dickbird is already in and our chances of ever being able to legitimately get rid of him are, alas, extremely remote.

    So this is only a problem in his own petty little smooth brain. And yet.

  • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    I mean, the popular vote means shit in the USA electoral system. Even if he didn’t achieve 50%, that is only a technicality, as he got 49.9%. So, he won also the popular vote by ~2,500,000 votes, which is more impressive than 1.6 points. So I think it was a landslide in its own terms, considering the triumphs in the Senate and the House. And fuck Trump, couldn’t fucking say this enough. Americans elected Trump. He is a consequence of their decisions. Own it.