No time to look at the elephant in the room. Pun intended.

(My title is meant as sarcasm, just in case it wasn't clear.)

Bill Maher on his show right after the election spent most of the time blaming Democrats, instead of voter suppression, voter ID laws, fake news, James Comey, Putin, and flat out election fraud. I guess the only way Democrats are allowed to win is if they have a lead that is so huge, it can't be stolen by republicans.

The Clinton campaign, like every campaign in history, made some significant errors and could have had a better plan. I think we all agree on that. I don't see anyone indicating that Clinton ran the perfect campaign, in part because the perfect campaign doesn't exist. And hindsight is 20/20.

That doesn't explain why Feingold lost. Or Teachout. Or any other number of Democrats running this term who were seemingly in position to make gains.

Everything you mentioned was a factor, some much more so than whatever faults some have decided were the primary (or only) factors in this race. Voter suppression (and, related, the major changes in Voter ID laws since 2013) alone were likely responsible for tens or hundreds of thousands of votes in the swing states. And, as we all know, the suppressed tend to be overwhelmingly Democratic.

Comey was no doubt a factor, perhaps the most influential one.

Exactly and all the pundits and strategists dissecting the Democrats campaigns gets maddening, as they often overlook the obvious. Anyone could run a better campaign, but that doesn't mean Democrats lost because they weren't as good as republicans. In most respects they were far better. Republicans cheat every way they can and Democrats are expected to quietly go in the corner and analyze their shortcomings.

Like the Democratic party, I am really good at beating myself up often over things that were beyond my control, but I know it is not usually a winning position. It seems Republicans are quick to blame others, whereas Democrats tend to blame themselves.

The constant Clinton bashing is old. Not sure if they are trolls or what, but it is over the top. I just tune them out now.

This is what I posted earlier about these votes that were discredited by the repukes. Why the fuck the DLC and others haven't fought against this I have no earthly idea?

Greg Palast wrote about this sinister crap being used in Florida during the 2000 election, in Ohio and other states in 2004 and more. Why hasn't the Democratic Party shone the light of truth and justice and the American way on this? Why is it still allowed to be applied so broadly? Where's the fight for these voters? Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory again. It's not like this is a surprise every four years.

I fear tomorrow I'll be crying. Confusion is my epitaph.

the Dems to fight against the obvious thefts in 2000 and 2004 and they rolled over. Just the effrontery of a gang of Republicans mobbing a courthouse to stop the FL recount should have made the Dems demand a recount of the whole state, but they did nothing. They've spent the past 16 years teaching the Pubs that there is no consequence if they mess with the election process. So they do. They are criminals and, in the absence of any serious policing, will act like criminals.

Bernie beat Hillary in CA and that the state wasn't going to count provisional votes. Every provisional vote was checked against registration rolls and the overwhelming majority were added to the vote totals -- all this could be traced in real time on the Secretary of State's website. But it took a few weeks for CA to go through the whole process, and the whole time Palast was saying that Bernie was being cheated.

There are plenty of other sources voicing concern over the Cross Check program.

Kris Kobach was instrumental getting Cross Check used in Kansas and it's now used in around 30 states. He's a top Trump adviser now.

https://theintercept.com/2016/12/05/trump-adviser-kris-kobach-harassed-kansas-voters-in-his-failed-quest-for-mass-election-fraud/

had a huge negative effect on the election.

What were the turnout rates in the states Clinton narrowly lost? Less than 60%?

It really damaged his credibility with a lot of people. A true shame, as almost all the rest of his work seems so vital and correct.

Unfortunately, unless we win by a landslide, the republicans will steal the election. Maybe we need to start using UN poll workers to make sure we have fair elections.

They'd have a harder time stealing it.

make questionable correlations.

He wears a funny hat.

Too much self marketing for me.

Unethical and racist, sure, but it's not "cheating," exactly. The Republicans are very good at gaming the system to their advantage...gerrymandering, strict voter ID requirements, closing polling stations, dismantling the VRA...all above-board tactics, despite what anyone might think of their basic decency and fairness.

I don't know about tossing provisional ballots--my suspicion is that this isn't as much of a factor as the other things that have been done to disenfranchise voters who would generally vote Democratic.

Might as well complain about the systemic racism of the drug war, and how so many likely Dem voters can't vote due to being locked up or not allowed to vote due to non-violent drug convictions...in my opinion it's horribly wrong, but it's not illegal.

close polling stations in rural areas? Strict voter ID doesn't hurt most white voters. Blue states typically don't gerrymander, and it's doubtful Dems will have enough power to gerrymander TX, OH, MI, etc any time soon.

However, even with rural whites the lower the income, the more left leaning so oops.

The fact is, fair elections have a liberal bias, which is why the GOP hates them so much.

but, if you live in a rural location, you're more likely to need a car to get around and have a driver's license. Somebody living in NYC, LA, Chicago, etc might be using public transportation and not have a driver's license.

Is it cheating in football to hobble about a third of your opponent's team before the game, so that they can't play?

Is it cheating to change the rules so that your points count for twice as much as your opponent's?

so, yeah. and it will only get worse once the R's control all branches of government.

more votes is deservedly declared the winner.

If we don't stopped it the repugs will cheat to win every election, and with the White House, the Senate, the House and a SCOTUS majority in place, they'll be able to change laws to make their cheating the LAW.

is going to enact very strict voter ID laws - driver's licenses, gun licenses, and maybe one or two other items.

we can regain control of Congress and pass laws against it. Obviously that won't happen for the next two years at least.

Tell me this - if the pre-election polls were are all wrong, all of them - why can't the exit polls be wrong for the same reason. Do you think that it is possible that people were ashamed to say they would vote or did vote for Trump? I know I would be ashamed to say that.

Conspiracy theories are for people who have trouble dealing with reality.

They're reality. North Carolina, for one, was doing them en masse until they got caught and were required to restore them.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/04/politics/north-carolina-naacp-voter-registration/index.html

Same thing in Ohio: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/10/ohio-voters-illegally-removed-from-rolls-may-cast-ballots.html

Polls are going to be inherently inaccurate if people who are registered voters don't get to vote or their votes don't count.

Some are Democrats, some are Republicans and some or independents. At several points in my life I was one of them as I moved state to state and from one voting precinct to another.

Again, you haven't shred of proof that mistakes made because of this program caused Hillary to lose the election. Normally people who are improperly removed from the voting roles can vote on a provisional ballots and if they were denied that right in massive numbers we would have heard about it by now.

Now quit your conspiracy theory BS!

You cannot possibly be serious. What do you think Voter ID laws are for?

That's the whole fucking idea.

And most of the voter suppression in this country is "legally' passed by Republicans in state legislators and signed by Republican governors. Those laws are not conspiracy theories. That is "legal" voter suppression, but it is not the illegal voter or election fraud as these stupid conspiracy theories would have you believe.

If we want to get rid of "legal" voter suppression which is often enacted under the guise of election security, there are two avenues. Challenge the laws in court and/or vote out the Republicans.

But stop peddling stupid conspiracy theories unless you have proof to back up your claims.

I have in '08, '12 and '16.

You work from a list of registered voters to call. One of the results boxes you check next to the name called is "deceased".

There are a few, but not many at all, nowhere close to what you're going on about. Same with moved voters. Most of those who've moved have re-registered already or welcome advice as to how to get back on the roll at their new address.

Yes, I have done some phone banking and I have noticed that I am not calling Republicans. Most of the time I was calling known Democratic voters and trying to get them out to the polls. I wasn't call people at random. The party does an excellent job of keeping those lists up to date in order to minimize lost time for their volunteers.

I said I agreed that there there are not many deceased and moved voters on the Democratic Party's voter lists. They are not even close to being the the same thing. The Democratic Party does an extremely good job of insuring that their volunteers are only spending their time calling eligible democratic voters and they know who they are and, in states with early voting, whether or not they have voted yet.

Over 18 Million Americans move every year. In addition almost 2.5 million Americans die every year - combined that is 22% of the US population. That means that there literally many millions of voters nationwide still on the voting rolls who are no longer eligible to vote.

Last edited Tue Dec 6, 2016, 02:51 AM - Edit history (1)

most of the time when you are calling someone that is deceased, the telephone number is disconnected, same with people that have moved. Whether or not they are still on the rolls is another story.

The GOP's Stealth War Against Voters

Will an anti-voter-fraud program designed by one of Trump's advisers deny tens of thousands their right to vote in November?

of voters who reportedly showed up to vote - but they couldn't, because they were no longer registered.

I have not seen any reports of this happening. Has anyone else?

People go an vote (there are many "provisional" ballots not typically carefully reviewed in recounts) and often the votes are disqualified that have already been cast

There is no way in many instances that a voter knows that their vote has been disqualified; hence exit polls off by a couple of percentage points, showing HRC victory but not including disqualified votes

Last edited Mon Dec 5, 2016, 09:29 PM - Edit history (2)

Kris Kobach is a Trump advisor:

https://theintercept.com/2016/12/05/trump-adviser-kris-kobach-harassed-kansas-voters-in-his-failed-quest-for-mass-election-fraud/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/8/25/1563577/-Kris-Kobach-has-yet-another-plan-to-rig-the-election-for-Republicans

If Democrats want to get to one of the biggest components of the GOP voter suppression efforts we need to look at programs like Interstate Cross Check which remove millions of voters from the voting roles. Most are removed correctly but the programs make mistakes and can easily remove a percentage of voters who shouldn't be.

The Interstate Cross Check program is used to remove voters who moved from a states voting roles. It started out in Kansas and is now used in over 30 states I think.

In Michigan the Interstate Cross Check program removed over 449,000 voters before this last election. If a significant portion of those people removed were done so wrongfully it could easily have swung the election results in Michigan.

There are many people on the voting roles who have died or moved. Some are Democrats, some are Republicans and some are independents. At several points in my life I was one of them as I moved state to state and from one voting precinct to another.

Again, you haven't shred of proof that mistakes made because of this program caused Hillary to lose the election. Normally people who are improperly removed from the voting roles can vote on a provisional ballots and if they were denied that right in massive numbers we would have heard about it by now.

Now quit your conspiracy theory BS!

And by the way: Please note one of your articles is entitled: "Trump Adviser Kris Kobach Harassed Kansas Voters in his Failed Quest for Mass Election Fraud." And by the way these are the vote totals for Kansas:

Donald J. Trump Republican 656,009 57.2%
Hillary Clinton Democrat 414,788 36.2

Hillary lost by 251K votes. Republicans hardly need to commit "massive election fraud' to win Kansas.

Or quit selling your BS!

I have moved many times from state to state and from one voting precinct to another. In each case, my name remained on the roles of the precinct where I had formally voted. There has to be some program to remove the names of people who have moved or died.

Now if too many mistakes are were made with one program or another, then adjustment definitely need to be made. However, if mistakes are made and people are improperly removed from the roles, they can still vote. That's why we have provisional ballots.

Again, unless you have PROOF of massive voter fraud, quit peddling your zany conspiracy theories. That BS is a distraction as we try to understand and fix why we lost.

vote.

The 7 million purged is the total number of people removed with the Cross Check program. But as Palast states it's the portion of those names purged which may be purged incorrectly that is in question.

Palast is in no way claiming voter fraud and is speaking about the exact opposite of that. Election fraud.

Errant voter purge programs like Cross Check, unethical voter id laws , and other tactics are all being used in concert to effectively keep people from their right to vote.

I don't, but we'll do it your way. Again, because you apparently haven't read my posts, show me proof of election fraud. Who cares how may were purged from the voter roles! You have given no indication of how many were incorrectly purged or that when this happened if was a result of fraud and not simple mistakes.

In addition you have given absolutely no evidence that people were not able to vote because their names were purged from the lists in such large number that it affected the results of the election. All you offer is conjecture and conjecture does not equal evidence.

Again, quit peddling your damn conspiracy theories unless you have proof of voter fraud or election fraud or whatever the hell you want to call it.

Can't you read?!

Thankfully New York chose to not go forth with the Cross Check voter purge software:

One, do you realize what the odds are that even useing two data points such as full name and data of birth will result in some being purged from the voting rules erroneously?

Even if people have very common names like James Smith, they make up only a tiny portion of the population of the country. For instance I just picked up a telephone book containing over 32,000 residential customers; it contained only 3 James Smiths and each of them had a different middle initial. So there were no duplicates.

Let's say there is a voter named James H Smith on the voter roles in Miami Florida and let's say that in San Francisco there a person on the roles also named James H. Smith and he has the exact same birth date. What are the chances that it isn't the same person who has perhaps moved from Miami to San Francisco? Here are the calculations.

The ages of the US voters vary tremendously from 18 to over a hundred, but there probably aren't many centenarians voting of those so lets just say that the upper limit is 75 to be conservative. So a voter could have a birth date in any one of 57 years. With 365 days in the average year, a particular voter could have anyone of (57 x 365) 20,805 different birth dates. So the chances that a James H. Smith with exactly the same birth date as the person on the voter roles in Florida is not these same person is somewhere around 1 in 20,000. Sure in a country its going to happen, but not often at all.

If you want to make the system fool proof, use social security numbers instead.

However, in the in the vast majority of the cases, the process of using full name and date of birth is going to correctly determine that the voter has moved when duplicates are found. Again, those incorrectly singled out by the process can still vote on provisional ballot.

So again you are peddling BS! And you may want to give more thought to your posts instead of just grabbing something off of the internet.

Bottom line yet again: Either produce proof of voter or election fraud are quit pushing your lame conspiracy theories.

Who care's what what anyone on the on the internet says about a subject. Opinion is not fact! You have yet to prove anything except that you know how to use Google!

And yes if you only use a persons first and last name that name is going to turn up often in other states. But if you use the entire name combined with date of birth (as you described in another post), the possibility of a erroneous match (one where it is not the same person) drops to almost zero for a particular person. And again, that why we have provisional ballots. Maybe until a better way of clearing the voter rolls can be instituted in every state, AA leaders should also get the word out that if your name is no longer on the voting rolls, ask for a provisional ballot.

18 Million Americans move every year. Another 2.5 Americans die every year. Together that is 22% of the US population. Something must be done to clean up the voting rolls. Are there better methods, yes. Certainly the use of Social Security numbers to make matches would drop the odds of improper matches to zero, but not all state voting rolls contain SS#'s.

In the mean time the Crosscheck system by it very nature is not a method of keeping massive numbers of people from voting unless there is proof that it is criminally misused and there is absolutely is no proof of that.

Again, quit misleading people with your conspiracy theories.

He actually met some of the people who were purged by crosscheck and said many did not even have the same middle initials. Jr's and Seniors with the same name were purged.

The Crosscheck list is supposed to also use a person's date of birth making the probability of someone being purged improperly a purged a 1 in 20,000 probability. If someone was improperly purging the voter rolls using the Crosscheck list as an excuse, they were committing a crime and should have been ushered into a jail cell to await prosecution.

as a form of suppression. You say, "peddling," "misleading," "conspiracy theory BS,"

You angrily demand numbers when teams of investigators can only do that.

You angrily toss around numerical logic which itself proves you only know math, but not the math realities of registration, voter mobility, vetted purges, registration, mail-in or provisional ballot counts.

You angrily refuse to accept the spirit of the claims made by election programmers, lawyers and other experts, nevermind Greg Palast.

This recount is real. The whole truth will come out in clearer numbers eventually.

Until then you can knock off the angry put-downs of anyone's understandings or explanations of their "googling," who try to keep DU interest in voter suppression alive around here.

Explain. Don't attack.

When we spout conspiracy theories which are devoid of facts, we are no better than those who do the same on the far right. For instance when Trump was blasted because he repeated the conspiracy theory that he lost the popular vote because "millions of people voted illegally", the counter was that those on the left were claiming the same thing except in reverse. And they are right.

It is true that the that the far left and the far right may have opposite ideologies, but their behavior, including the tendency to spout conspiracy theories, are very similar. See "Horseshoe Theory".

No one should publish crap on the internet until they are reasonably sure it is correct, that means AFTER an investigation is conducted, not before.

My undergraduate degree implies that I know math and I know from experience the "realities of registration, voter mobility, vetted purges, registration, mail-in or provisional ballot counts". If you read the many posts I have made on this OP, you will see that I do.

I never said a damn thing about "to accept the spirit of the claims made by election programmers, lawyers and other experts"; that was never brought up. The subject was never brought up; the entire discussion with the penguin was about the Palast BS.

However, I will says something about the recounts now. Sure I would like to see the results in the three states reversed, but I have next to no hope that will happen. The problem is that the irregularities in certain voting districts reported by "election programmers, lawyers and other experts" can be explained by the different demographics in those area. (See the article by Nate Silver on his 538 website:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/demographics-not-hacking-explain-the-election-results/
Demographics, Not Hacking, Explain The Election Results ]

I am glad that the recounts are in progress. At minimum they will restore faith in the US election system in the eyes of the world - and that is important. As I said, I would love for the election results to be reversed, but I am not holding my breath.

What we are seeing now on DU with all of the talk of election and voter fraud is a stage of grief called "bargaining". (Five stages of grief: Denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.) There is nothing wrong with that, it is a natural process, but it is not okay to make fools of all Democrats by displaying your paranoia for all to see.

is what you are doing. Shutting down further inquiry. Further inquiry is part of theory, an Enlightenment value that drives scientific inquiry, as well. Thus, you're wrong about the horsehoe "model," as I would call it, about left and right tendencies. I can list scientists who claim that conservative politics kept them from developing broad data bases needed to ground theories, yet another example of why 'theories' take so long to become accepted as solid, unrevisable history.

So what if these people have no facts yet. They're not journalists or undercover, and yet they are supporting those who are. There is absolutely nothing to associate them with right-wingnut theories, since no one on that end of your "horseshoe" model tries to ground their theories with raw data.

This is a 50-state, 50-state legal, jurisdictional and all around record-keeping nightmare. It's a nightmare. It's labor and time intensive. It's not googling. Yet, as people around here want to build evidence from sources, from google, no less, you decide to berate them.

So yeah, glad you took pains to lecture me about the cost/benefits of "conspiracy theories." I've only been dealing with this crap since the 70's, but feel free.

Okay, let me explain "the spirit" of communication, based on this part of what you said above:

"...I never said a damn thing about "to accept the spirit of the claims made by election programmers, lawyers and other experts"; that was never brought up. The subject was never brought up; the entire discussion with the penguin was about the Palast BS..."

No, you didn't. I did. Understand that what is generally understood about the "spirit" of people's communications around here are the good faith attempts to work together to build an accurate map.

Of reality, elections, a path ahead.

You choose to call it a stage of grief, if you wish. But that's too convenient when real criminal vote count fraud is being investigated. Adults can still be high functioning in all the stages of grief, and they do so with eyes vigilant to actual, factual events they pay attention to. So please remember as real events unfold, we're not talking psychological theory here, either.

This is not about bargaining with losing. DU'ers do not exhibit any anti-spirit or bad faith attempts to deliberately mislead, lie, cast doubt or float other people's lies or conspiracies. Skinner and the old heads have cleaned house and kept hackers at bay and have well articulated policies about that so far. Even you seem to have cleared an alert.

No one needs to be spoken to as if they are full of bs or deliberately trying to bs anyone.
We are not dupes.
We are not duping each other.
We are not fooling each other or stirring paranoia.
You have no evidence for any of those claims.

There are creditable sources many in DU tend to rely on. I go for Tom Englehardt with TomDispatch, Mother Jones, The New Yorker and everything Palast does. I think we even have a black list of bad sources.

In the spirit of looking at credibility, you could give the struggling journalists who are 95% right most of the time a break, too, and not label their claims or anyone who quotes their claims here as bs, either.

So, I call it the "spirit" of mapping -- the attempt to "map" together what is happening.

Just because you have a point -- which you have flung at people as if it's the final word against their stubborn intents to mislead themselves and other -- in repeating that there isn't sufficient evidence yet to have hope that we can prove rigging, your point doesn't mean that your truth is better, more lasting and the final reason to stop this "nonsense" -- it doesn't mean that you should discourage people who show hope that legal and journalistic digging is going to get us -- you -- the evidence we all want.


We need to support activities that support our interests. That includes hope talk, not conspiracy talk, over the damned hard slog of mapping what really happened in red states that had previously gone blue. No beginning, whether it's government, constitution, voting system, study of the mind, starts off with all the facts and evidence. This issue is no different. We also don't have all the historical patterns of voting conflicts to help guide the investigations.

If you'd agree that people's personality is not a solid indicator of their core personhood, we can come to trust the good intent of DU members around these issues and ease up on each other until this arduous process gets sorted out.

The vast majority of past conspiracy theories remained just that, conspiracy theories and they were thus eventually consigned to the trash bins of history. The few CT's that have turned out to be true - well, in the South we have saying for that, "Even a blind hog finds an acorn once and a while" or perhaps one with which you may be more familiar: Even a stopped clock is right twice a day".

And the Horseshoe Theory is valid in my opinion, especially at the extremes. For instance at the far left wing the USSR (founded on extreme left wing Communist principles) was virtually indistinguishable in its actions from far right wing dictatorships. But it also is reasonably valid as peoples' ideologies begin to depart significantly from the center. While their ideologies may be completely different, the behaviors of the far left and the far right in this country are too closely aligned to be coincidence. Those on the far right and the far left:

1) Both believe that they and they alone are ideologically pure and must maintain that purity. They both think that anyone who doesn't hold their ideological opinions must be wrong.

2) Both believe that those who claim to be on the same side of the ideological spectrum, but are more centralist have been at best "mislead". And it isn't unusually for those on the far left to label fellow progressives to their right "conservatives" while those on the far right often label conservatives to their left ideologically "liberals".

3) Both abhor making concessions and compromising because they "cannot in good conscious compromise their principles.

4) Both are usually not very successfully politically because those who are successful in politics compromise to get things done, and both lack the capacity to compromise.

5) Both often cling to conspiracy theories when they lose, because they know they are right and the other side is wrong. So how could the people on the side of right possibly lose unless the other side cheated.

(There are other similarities, but I don't want to bore you.)

And no, nothing I have written should leave anyone to believe that I mean to preclude investigations into situations which may be questionable. In fact I favor investigations because they get the truth out. Either conspiracy theories are proven to be correct (in which case they are no longer conspiracy theories) or they are proven wrong, as is usually the case. Of course in the case of the latter, some wing nuts will still come up with a new conspiracy theory that the investigation was tainted.

So, I am more than happy with the recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. I don't think that the election results will be reversed in any of those state, but even, so if they are done correctly it will be add even more credibility to the American Election system.

What I do have a problem with is people giving voice to conspiracy theories when they don't have a shred of evidence to back up their opinions and all they really have is questionable situations which haven't been investigated. It is more than okay to point out that things in a certain situation don't seem to add up and to insist on an investigation. That is even laudable. However, for people to point to a situation that doesn't look right and and insist that there was cheating though they have no evidence at all is reprehensible. And I will continue to call them out on it.

is not cause for you to assert they are conspiracy minded. They are not. Not here.

You say, "...It is more than okay to point out that things in a certain situation don't seem to add up and to insist on an investigation..."

Then you insist you can tell the difference between their logical doubts about counter-intuitive processes and their being conspiracy-minded. I'm saying ease up and let this longass process go forward without namecalling.

If you "continue to call them out on it," you're going to get challenged yourself.

First of all, I took pains to talk everyone everyone of your points regardless of how lame I thought some of them to be and I thought I did darn good job. I note that you are evidently unable to counter my arguments point by point, but let's let that go. Let's instead explore your present one.

These people aren't concentrating on calling for investigations into what they regard as suspicious situations. (And if they were who in the hell of any importance did they expect was going pay any attention to what they write on DU?) No, apparently they passionately believe without any solid evidence that the election was stolen and they trying to convince others of the same. That's called pushing conspiracy theories.

If you don't believe me, you need only to re-read the OP. Written cloudythescribbler, it is entitled, "Why not more discussion of Greg Palast's compelling case that GOP stole 2016 election: The following are the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of the OP copied and pasted without alteration from the original post:

"the seven million disqualified votes includes hundreds of thousands of voters in the 3 key swing states where there is a recount push

these states are particularly intense venues of these cheating schemes as they are Republican-controlled and key swing states"


The following are the last three paragraphs from the OP:
"so now the 2000 election, 2004 and 2016 have been stolen

the idea that if the GOP gets close enough to stealing an election that it is normally possible (with heavier and heavier thumbs on the scale) to steal it, then they get to do so, with a minimum of fuss being made"

and obviously things will only get MUCH worse now in terms of honest voting"

This guy isn't trying call attention to possible problem so it can be investigated. Any one who has a brain and who can read can tell tell the difference between whether cloudythescribbler is having "logical doubts" or if he is trying to convince others the election was stolen. This guy is flat out saying that the election was stolen.

When someone categorically makes those kinds of charges and without evidence to back them up, they are dealing with conspiracy theories.

Do your really think this OP would have been posted on DU if Hillary had won? However, I can almost guarantee that some right wing Trumpsters would be making similar arguments if Trump had lost. Heck, Trump is claiming the election was rigged because he didn't win the popular vote. Isn't it interesting that conspiracy theories are only pushed by the losing side? I guess some people find solace by choosing to believe that the election was stolen.

until proof of the counting through recounts is in, we still have reason to doubt. We still have to have voter enthusiasm.

It may seem lame to make the same charges that losing Republicans would make, that Bernie even made, but there is also misplaced solace in nurturing doubts but doing nothing to dispell them. People leave when they have doubts, and the winners love that.

And there are still other prevalent attitudes and behaviors -- self righteous dwelling on scapegoats is one of them, how to win over voters is another -- that persist throughout this party and need serious revising.

I still think facts, learning from mistakes -- no excuses, getting a winning vision of winning -- are tools for this party's revising its map.

I very much appreciate your taking the time to explain where you're coming from.

This has happened on several occasions on DU. I entered into "vigorous discussions" with another member which lasted through several posts. As we begin to understand each others points of view, it turned out that we weren't so far apart after all and actually came to a kind of meeting of the minds or at least mutual respect the each other's views. The key it seem is keeping the conversation somewhat civil.

Let's "talk" again sometime.

... voter fraud

They have to be caught red-handed suppressing or flipping botes, and the system they devised hides that activity.

Show me proof of massive voter fraud. Otherwise you are selling BS!

I said nothing about voter fraud, and do not suspect it had anything significant to do with the outcome.

My apologies

You want proof? See the links below. The repugs even bragg about stopping certain 'others' from voting.

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/gop-now-openly-bragging-about-suppressing-voters

http://www.eclectablog.com/2016/12/michigan-republicans-add-appropriation-to-voter-suppression-bill-making-it-democracy-proof-immune-from-citizen-referendum.html

Much better to just ignore the sucking chest wound and maybe it will just go away by itself.

to try and see what other sources are saying.

Cross check has been under the radar with the MSM but some news outlets have covered it.

.... was a failed effort which occurred in Kansas where Hillary lost by 250K votes. Damn, that was some fraud if they pulled that off.

It is conjecture and hypothetical votes. But if millions of people went to the polls and found out they couldn't vote, why is there no evidence for it?

If you have PROOF that the election was stolen, let's here it. Otherwise you're just pushing another conspiracy theory.

valid, but Greg Palast is no longer someone I trust. Most of the "media" have their story, now, so they are pleased. And, Republicans have nearly all of the political and economic control. We will see more voter suppression and less coverage. Hillary Clinton ran an excellent campaign and won. The Republicans set the bar higher every time.