It’s Not Republicans Who Are Reluctant to Accept Political Outcomes They Don’t Like

Spread the love

Loading

“Can Republicans relearn how to accept political outcomes they don’t like?” What in holy hell is the Washington Post’s Paul Waldman talking about? According to the piece, Matt Bevin’s (completely legal) request to re-canvass the Kentucky election portends an unwillingness by the GOP to accept the results the democratic process. Talk about projection.

We shouldn’t have to say more than “Stacey Abrams.” And it’s not just that the Democrat is a full-blown conspiracy theorist, it’s that leading members of her party enable her attacks on veracity of elections. Joe Biden claimed, without any evidence, that “voter suppression is the reason why Stacey Abrams isn’t governor right now.” Pete Buttigieg said suppression “racially motivated” in his remarks to the group that Abrams “ought to be governor.” And they’re not alone.



Abrams lost by 54,723 votes.

Waldman gives Abrams a pass for her recalcitrance, because, he notes, she “ended her campaign for governor of Georgia but pointedly refused to call it a ‘concession’ because, she said, it would grant the election, in which her opponent engaged in various forms of voter suppression, a legitimacy it did not deserve.” Well, yes, that’s the point, isn’t it? Everyone has a reason for why they don’t accept results. Democrats tend to rely on nebulous claims of “voter suppression.” But Abrams had legal avenues available to her, and they turned up nothing. Unlike Abrams, Bevin hasn’t argued that the results won’t be legitimate. “So why can’t they just let the process play itself out?

Then again, Georgia’s gubernatorial election is a trivial sideshow compared to 2016 presidential race they’ve never accepted as legitimate. Less than two months ago, Hillary Clinton was still telling CBS News that “Trump knows he’s an illegitimate president.” Earlier this year, she claimed that, “You can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you.” Here you have the most widely known Democrat in the nation maintaining that the election was stolen from her. Putting your party above your country in this way is, as someone once noted, just “horrifying.”

At one point, 67 percent of Democrats believed that it was “definitely true” that the Russians had tampered with voting tallies to make Trump president though no such evidence exists.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

18 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

At one point, 67 percent of Democrats believed that it was “definitely true” that the Russians had tampered with voting tallies to make Trump president though no such evidence exists.

And where would all these people get such an impression? From, as our friend Greg asserts, some conservative website on the internet? Nope, this comes from the overwhelming bulk of our Main Street Media, the institution that exists to protect citizens from government oppression and hold our elected representatives to accounts. Yes, the Truth Industry has worked tirelessly to promote the illusion that Trump is President instead of Hillary because the Russians would, for some reason, want Trump to be President instead of the person they have worked for decades constructing dossiers loaded with blackmail fodder, enough to make that person rename the United States “Russia II” if they so demanded.

Beyond any doubt, Bevin should have a recount. Take a look at the honesty and credibility of Democrats just over the past 3 years; their propensity to cheat in elections is renown. Remember Florida in 2018? Anything with less than a 10,000 vote differential should be viewed with suspicion. Democrats cannot be trusted.

Curt, let me see if I can help explain what Paul Waldman was talking about.

Many states have a recount option if the margin is within .5%.

KY does not.

Bevin lost by .4% and has asked for a “recanvas” which the KY Democrats have no issue with. A recanvas is simply a verification of the reported votes per precinct which no one of either party believes will change (KY is predominantly red so most county clerks who oversee the elections are Republicans). If the count doesn’t change significantly, Bevin can request a full recount and if the KY court agrees, it can be done at Bevin’s expense.

There was also talk at the time of Waldman’s article (conveniently omitted) about KY Republican Senate President Robert Stivers announcing an arcane rule which would allow the state House and Senate to make a ruling based on Bevin’s accusations of “irregularities” in the election. See where that “reluctance to accept” comes in? No regurgitates have been found or even brought up from other than Bevin.

Since Waldman’s article, Stivers has backed away from that and even said that Bevin should elaborate on these irregularities or concede.

It should be pointed out that KY didn’t go blue by any stretch as other than Bevin, it was a Republican sweep. The thing with Bevin was that both Ds and Rs hated him, teachers hated him. The polling was pretty much dead on.

Another part of the article mentioned Trump’s lie about improving Bevin’s outcome by 15% to 17%, that Bevin would have lost by a landslide had he not come to KY to stump for him. That’s another part of explanation of Republicans refusing to accept election outcome realities. They just make up anything.

I campaigned hard for Beshear. I drove a lot of miles, delivered a lot of yard signs, shook a lot of hands, and was flipped a lot of birds. I also closely followed all polls including internal polls of both campaigns. Nobody anywhere predicted anything other than a barn burner finish.

Trump and Bevin are once again lying through their teeth and seem unable to accept the reality of a political outcome.

Hillary certainly is the poster child for Democrats who refused to accept a political outcome.

Only recently, adding to her 90 or so “reasons why the election was “stolen” from her, she said, she could beat Donald Trump AGAIN.

“Maybe there does need to be a rematch. Obviously, I can beat him again.”

Delusional, much?

@Deplorable Me:

And where would all these people get such an impression?

The conclusion that the Russians meddled extensively in our 2016 presidential election comes from the bipartisan United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, which issued a two-volume report in 2019 after conducting a comprehensive study of all evidence.

Here is Volume 1, and here is Volume 2.

The GOP-led committee also concluded in their report that an aggressive response would be needed to prevent the same damn thing from happening again, but the Trump administration hasn’t done diddly squat. (Unless you want to count pitching the theory that Ukraine meddled on behalf of Clinton and Russia has been falsely accused.)

October 8, 2019 – Bipartisan Senate report calls for sweeping effort to prevent Russian interference in 2020 election

The U.S. Director of National Intelligence and U.S. Intelligence Community reached the same conclusion in January 2017:

Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections

On March 22, 2018, the republican-led House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence issued their Report on Russian Active Measures, which also concluded that the Russians conducted an extensive and sophisticated covert operation intended to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.

Anyone who believes the Russian operation was undertaken with the intention of aiding the Clinton campaign is delusional. Anyone who assumes there was no coordination with the Trump campaign hasn’t been paying attention. There’s a lot of evidence suggesting there was coordination. Mueller just didn’t find enough evidence to establish that a criminal conspiracy existed. Trump’s claim of “total exoneration” is a load of manure.

@Greg: Russia Russia, Russia, but insufficient evidence.
Brother I found a good way for you to pick up chicks first you have to lay out the big bucks for whistles(dog whistles) https://townhall.com/tipsheet/juliorosas/2019/11/07/antitrump-protesters-harass-guests-visitors-
greasy, poorly dressed, foul,loud mouthed, but I bet you could snuggle and watch Madcow together.
get a lint roller for the cat hair.

We gotta get you a Women-Todd Rundgren
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHQaniX3uGc

@Nan G: What I wouldn’t give to see that. Maybe she’s worried O’Rook’s going to have more failed campaigns than she does.

@kitt, #5:

The evidence establishing that Russia mounted a sophisticated covert operation to rig our 2016 presidential election and widen internal divisions within the United States was abundant, and far more than sufficient for the U.S. Intelligence Community, the FBI, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence—the latter two being led by republican majorities at the time the investigations were conducted and the reports issued.

Everybody but Trump & Company agreed that it was an attack by a foreign power—namely, Russia—on the United States. There now appear to be even more players involved besides Russia. Iran, certainly. China, quite possibly. And here we are, with an administration pretending that none of it happened or is still happening.

People need to snap the hell out of it.

@Greg: The Senate and House Committees are reliant on the findings of the IC and FBI for their findings. What we are learning, more and more day after day, is that the IC and FBI have been infiltrated and weaponized to the point that their findings now have to be considered with a political grain of salt. Until the investigations into the ongoing coup against Trump is completed and the proper corrective actions taken, we can’t accept any of their findings at face value. Democrats happily believe what serves their agenda.

Thanks, Obama.

Perhaps this is why Democrats are so desperately trying to block Trump getting Ukraine to do introspective investigations into how they might have tampered with our election? Russian interference has become a go-to excuse for Democrats to blame everything on.

All the separate components of the intelligence community, the FBI, and America’s mainstream journalistic community are part of one vast conspiracy against Donald J Trump, the nation’s only true patriot, only steady hand on the tiller, and sole truth-teller?

I don’t think so. I don’t consider that to be even a remote possibility. This guy is the internal danger. He’s destroying national unity, our governmental institutions, confidence in our journalistic establishments, and driving the United States and its proven long-time allies apart, while showing an unseemly fondness for authoritarian leaders and our long-time geopolitical adversaries. All of this, and it’s only costing us a trillion-a-year in rising national debt while the economy is on a stimulant binge. What a deal.

@Greg: No we wont accept Russians could only hypnotize with meme magic the fly over country, that they wouldnt concentrate on heavily populated states Cali and NY. It ridiculous on its face, especially if the data was provided by silicon, we will censor and shadowban you, valley. JW has a video being censored on you tube right now. All it deals with is White House visitor logs of the previous admin, if they dont like cover-up conspiracy theories, stop feeding them.
Schiff is giving the theories steriods.

@Greg: Trump colluded with Russians, obstructed justice, committed brazen extortion but despite spying, surveillance and three investigations, we just can’t find a single bit of evidence of it.

Yeah, I ain’t buying THAT.

So, why use unverified and doubtful information to launch investigations on Trump? Why conduct MASSIVE amounts of spying on law abiding citizens and then spread that throughout all government agencies? Why alter 302 memos from interviews? Why deploy assets to plant information in targets, then assets to retrieve it so the target can be prosecuted? That’s not even the full description of the effort.

Why do all this if Trump is guilty of something? In fact, why commence this before he has even take office? You can deny all you want, but the current impeachment circus pretty much confirms the entire accusation.

This amounts to children taking a small victory and equating it to total domination.

Something the Dems try to leverage, with anything they can…not matter how irrationally.

I don’t want the Dem party to die: we have a balance of views that live in both Rep and Dem parties.

There were, however, many in the Dem party who tried to engineer a permanent dominance over our country, which is tyranny.

Trump’s “impeachment” is that faction of Democrats’ death throes as we find just how deeply their corruption went…like a trapped squid inking.

@Nathan Blue:

I don’t want the Dem party to die: we have a balance of views that live in both Rep and Dem parties.

But they are turning themselves into something that does not belong in the United States of America. The party of Schumer, Pelosi, Nadler and Schiff belongs somewhere in South America or Eastern Europe, not here. We’ve fought wars to eradicate such vile trash only to have it try to usurp power right here at home.

@Deplorable Me:

@Nathan Blue:

I don’t want the Dem party to die: we have a balance of views that live in both Rep and Dem parties.

But they are turning themselves into something that does not belong in the United States of America.

What has been happening is that the Republican Party has split into what the Republican Party used to be plus what the Democrat Party used to be.
It has split into a globalist faction of liberal Republicans who want to preside over what they consider to be an inevitable decline of American dominance VERSUS a more conservative, America-first, anti-globalist faction that wants America to continue to be a leading force on earth.
The Dems are destroying themselves.
What will be left will be these two factions of Republicans.

@Nan G: We have 2 parties Evil and Stupid, when they pass a bipartisan bill…………

@Nan G: That’s a good point, Nan. I agree.

My own views haven’t really changed, but what the political world calls my views has.

Interesting…

November 12, 2019 – ‘Anonymous’ author warns that Trump ‘will not exit quietly,’ even if defeated or impeached

The anonymous official who has written a scathing account of the presidency of Donald Trump suggests the president might refuse to leave office even if convicted in impeachment hearings or defeated narrowly in the 2020 election – and says Trump is preparing his followers to see either outcome as a “coup” that could warrant resistance.

“He will not exit quietly – or easily,” the author, self-described as a senior administration official, writes in A Warning, a book that builds on an explosive op-ed by the same unnamed author last year. USA TODAY obtained an early copy of the book.

“It is why at many turns he suggests ‘coups’ are afoot and a ‘civil war’ is in the offing. He is already seeding the narrative for his followers – a narrative that could end tragically.”

As the House of Representatives prepares to open public impeachment hearings Wednesday, the book also says that Trump ordered aides more than a year ago to pursue a “deliberate and coordinated campaign” to obstruct an impeachment inquiry and other congressional investigations. House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff has said he is considering obstruction of Congress as a possible Article of Impeachment.

The book’s author is identified only as “a senior official in the Trump administration,” and its forthcoming publication has created a firestorm over both its depiction of a dysfunctional president and the decision by the writer to remain anonymous.

“The coward who wrote this book didn’t put their name on it because it is nothing but lies,” White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham said.

Many of the disclosures echo news stories that have portrayed the president as impulsive, sometimes uninformed and regularly willing to defy established norms. There is already no shortage of books by Trump critics, including former FBI director James Comey and others who have served in his administration, that raise questions about the president’s fitness for office.

But The New York Times op-ed in 2018 and the new book, being published next Tuesday by Twelve, have commanded enormous attention because the author had an inside view, often participating in small White House meetings where crucial decisions were made.

The author portrays himself or herself as sharing some policy views with Trump and initially having a positive if wary view of the possibilities of his presidency.

The author says the intended audience for A Warning isn’t those who closely follow politics but rather those who don’t, particularly voters from across the country who were drawn in 2016 to Trump’s promise to shake up the establishment.

The book says that Trump “on more than one occasion” discussed with staffers the possibility of dropping Vice President Mike Pence before the 2020 election.

“Former UN ambassador Nikki Haley was under active consideration to step in as vice president, which she did not discourage at first,” the author writes, saying some advisers argued that putting Haley on the ticket would help the president bolster his support among female voters.

In an interview Friday with USA TODAY, Nikki Haley dismissed out of hand the suggestion that she might replace Pence. In her new book, With All Due Respect, Haley offers a generally positive portrait of Trump, and the president rewarded her with a friendly tweet urging his millions of followers to buy a copy.

@Greg:

November 12, 2019 – ‘Anonymous’ author warns that Trump ‘will not exit quietly,’ even if defeated or impeached

You might as well add that to your list of “impeachable offenses”. You have as much evidence of that as you do for anything else.