Trump’s return to the White House with an enduring number of loyalists in Congress underscores just how politically trivial the ‘election denier’ label has become.
Trump’s return to the White House with an enduring number of loyalists in Congress underscores just how politically trivial the ‘election denier’ label has become.
It’s hard for me to get excited by the label of “election denier” . Ignoring the partisan labels and all the loaded meanings behind the term.
It’s very hard to deny or defend the vote counts if they are not publicly counted. Mail in ballots are publicly verified.
Election machine counts are done by trade secrets. Often by conservative owners. We take these on faith, and ignore exit polling or other checks and balances.
So this election denier stuff has all the hallmarks of some talk about God, faith and county; which is great but everyone has an opinion with no facts to back them up
But there are facts to back them up?
I think nobody debating knows either way unless one takes the official counts at face value.
In a regular democracy, like most of Europe, this is easy, the counts are publicly vetted by all the candidates or their representatives beforehand.
Here in America this is done differently. The majority of the votes in many states are announced to everyone at the same time including the candidates. Nobody can say “here is a proof I can understand so the vote is ok”. We have to trust several private companies without verification or understanding how they did it. Nor do we use secondary verification in many places
So it’s a matter of faith. It you trust, really trust all these private software companies to get it right and not be compromised or corrupt . Then that is the end of the conversation.
If you don’t trust them I’d think they have ulterior motives that is another thing.
But again, who knows? Which is why doubt has been able to exist here