You're viewing a single thread.
Election denialism seems to just now be a feature of American politics
I’m sorry, but this is the most egregious example of “both sides do it” that I’ve ever seen.
The republicans made denying the election a central pillar of their platform, and the lies was repeated by virtually every leader in the party. And a violent mob stormed the capitol in an attempt to overturn the vote.
Show me a fragment of that being done by the left.
You're under a post where someone is engaged in election denialism. You go to social media, even here, you can see it.
You know, both sides doing something doesn't mean or even imply that it's to equal degree. It's just that both sides in the US seem to be doing it right now.
Of course it’d be both sides. They use projection to shield themselves. So if they were going to steal an election, they’d accuse the dems of doing it first.
This isn’t conscious but they think everyone thinks like them so if they’re trying to steal the election obviously the dems are too.
You know, both sides doing something doesn't mean or even imply that it's to equal degree. It's just that both sides in the US seem to be doing it right now.
On this point, you are completely wrong. When you have one party making election denialism a core of their belief system while on the other side you have a few random people making claims on social media, it is absurd to claim that “both sides … seem to be doing it right now”. The very fact of you attempting to make the argument implies that there is equivalence between the two sides.
No, both sides have not made denialism central to their party platform. No, the Democrats did not have any cabinet nominees who refused to acknowledge the legitimacy of the last election. No, both sides did not storm the Capitol building in an attempt to prevent the certification of the election.
No, both sides are not doing it.
When you have one party making election denialism a core of their belief system while on the other side you have a few random people making claims on social media, it is absurd to claim that “both sides … seem to be doing it right now”.
But that's both sides doing it. You just described people from both sides doing it...
No, both sides have not made denialism central to their party platform. No, the Democrats did not have any cabinet nominees who refused to acknowledge the legitimacy of the last election. No, both sides did not storm the Capitol building in an attempt to prevent the certification of the election.
Right, and I never claimed so.
No, both sides are not doing it.
I'm sorry but they are. What you have a problem is understanding the difference (not even nuance) of "both sides are doing it" and "both sides are doing it to the same degree/same level/whatever". It's two very different things.
Both sides would refer to equivalent people doing it, so actual political members of the party since that's where the Republicans set the bar, not just some random public citizens on the internet.
Both sides would refer to equivalent people doing it
No it doesn't. Both sides are doing X can just mean literally that, both sides are doing X. You're confusing that with "both siding", where you are saying that with the intention to imply that they're somehow equivalent or equal. And that's not what I'm doing, as you can probably tell by now.
Just recognizing that it's happening on both sides doesn't mean or even imply you think it's happening to the same degree.
What do you think “both siding” entails?
It is the simple reduction of two completely disproportionate responses to the phrase “both sides do it”.
The same logic keeps being applied to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Both sides are fighting, they say, so both sides share equal responsibility for the destruction and for making peace.
I believe you when you say it isn’t your intent to do so, but in that case you are doing so obliviously. You don’t even know who the commenter is, so it’s pure assumption on your part that they’re even left wing to begin with.
What do you think “both siding” entails?
Both siding requires the intent to equate the two to make one side seem less bad. I'm not doing that, I'm just recognizing the fact both sides are, objectively, doing it. You are reading into that, thinking I'm equating things. And that's just not true.
You don’t even know who the commenter is, so it’s pure assumption on your part that they’re even left wing to begin with.
If you mean @barry_aptt then I'm happy to report that I did check their profile before making my original comment.
In that case you are naively both-siding this issue.
To help clarify: if somebody was to read your first comment, are they likely to infer that the two sides are equivalent?
Are you claiming I'm both-siding because someone might read into it something that was never there? Amazing. This is like calling something totally innocent "dogswhistling" because you misunderstood the meaning. The intent is like the thing, without it it's just not both-siding or dogwhistling.
Never thought I'd see someone pronouncing the death of the author about Lemmy comments lol.
If you mean @barry_aptt then I'm happy to report that I did check their profile before making my original comment.
This is exactly what I’m talking about. You have no idea who that person is, what correlation their posting has to their political position, or in fact whether they exist at all. And you’re drawing equivalence between that post and a recorded statement by the president.
>Account constantly posts anti-Trump, anti-Republican, pro-Democratic party messages
>"You have no idea what correlation their posting has to their political position"
Right right.
you’re drawing equivalence between that post and a recorded statement by the president.
If I said both cats and dogs animals, would you get upset over me drawing equivalence between cats and dogs? Give me a break.
It should be plainly obvious everything that Republicans complain about is sheer projection.
If they are complaining about rigged elections, do you think they themselves rigged the recent elections?
So do a lot of people a lot smarter than myself.
It's not even like this is the first time. Everyone who's able and interested should check out the HBO documentary Hacking Democracy about the 2004 election.
It was fascinating in 2008 watching a FOX anchor arguing with their in-house analysts when they called Ohio for Obama. He was arguing that the votes would start shifting to McCain just like they did for Bush in 2004. Sure enough, the same glitch happened, but the vote ratio didn't change.
He started getting frantic after that, sure that the votes would start going for McCain any minute. It was super obvious he knew about what actually happened in 2004.
Interestingly, "Anonymous" claimed to have blocked the hack saving the election; which is both nonsense and probably technically true at the same time.
Drag googled "Anonymous Obama election" and couldn't find anything
Interesting times ahead for the US when both of their major sided are losing (or lost) faith in elections.
The right got dozens of days in court to share whatever evidence they claimed to have that 2020 was stolen. They couldn't provide a single shred of evidence for voter fraud that wasn't in their favor. Now, with plenty of evidence, if the other side requests their day in court they are called crazy and conspiracy theorists and blue maga and blue anon and any other number of ad hominem attacks. What are they afraid of, if there was no hack let them prove it in court. But republicans don't play fair and they never have, so why are Dems playing so easily into their hands? Are they that desperate to distance themselves from what they've seen as crazy election deniers? That means all the ad hominem worked.
💯
Verifying the vote isn’t denialism. The evidence is compelling and coherent. Too many whiners not enough debunkers!
Like said, interesting times coming up.
Natural result of decades of erosion to the fourth estate.
Thanks Ronald.
...but only when Republicans lose. When Democrats lose, it's decorum all the way down. So basically, Republicans will never admit to losing fairly ever again, because election denialism isn't punished.
I've seen a lot of election denialism after the most recent Republican wins. Not equal amounts to after Republican loss, not even close, but still a noticeable amount.
Notably, though, not from anyone really in a leadership position. Where's Biden calling a governor and asking him to help him out, just a little? Where's the senators and party board screaming about it?
That's true
It’s not really denialism when there’s evidence. Verify the evidence.
It’s only denialism when it’s irrational and not based on coherent arguments. (Ie. Trump in 2020)
Folk on the internet will say a lot of stupid shit without evidence to back it up, that's why "a lot of people are saying" should be a statement that carries a significant amount of skepticism and doubt. I don't see much actual denialism coming from Democratic leadership.
The infuriating, part is that I expect the Dem leadership to at least be interested enough in knowing the truth to investigate and uncover facts that could lead to credible accusations of election interference. The yokels online are gonna be mad no matter what, but did the party really expect the guy who credibly cheated in the last two elections to not cheat again? ESPECIALLY since he was specifically not punished for it despite being found guilty? I hate that the smallest hint of truth-seeking efforts gets shot down as some kind of betrayal of party morals.
"I didn't lose!!! It's eh the others that are cheating..."
So far it has only proven to be a feature of donald trump, and there is no evidence to the contrary.
It's definitely a lot more widespread than just Donald Trump.
You should look at chess competitions.
ahem Magnus Carlsen accusing Hans Niemann withiut evidence ahem
Ah yes the anal beads saga
Democrats are desperately willing to cling on to anything that will allow the party to continue on business as usual.
Perhaps this is because deep down in their hearts they understand that the DNC will not change no matter the circumstances, no matter the consequences. It's not what their donors desire.
At least the republicans are completely idiotic, what is your excuse blue conservatives?
Videos on Electoral Reform
First Past The Post voting (What most states use now)
Videos on alternative electoral systems we can try out.