Trump Will Claim Election "Illegitimate" if Dems Win

I don't think so, either.

I'm only defending Trump's right to try; I'm not saying it will be successful because I don't think it will be.

No, thanks.

A revote is not going to happen; even if the will were there, it could probably not be organized in time. And there would be lawsuits to prevent it.

As for recounts, they will happen only where the law or a court requires it.

It was predicted for the 2016, 2018, and 2020 elections because Trump basically said it's what he would do. Difference in 2018 was that as the article points out it's only worth trying if things seem close enough that trying to overturn things could make a difference.

If this was happening in Eastern Europe or South America very few Republicans would have a problem calling it out for what it is - a leader who knows he has lost an election fighting to overturn the vote not because he thinks there the loss is a result of flaws, but because he thinks the ability for him to lose is a flaw in the system.

He's trying to change the outcome through the legal means that are open to him. When he tries to go beyond legal means, then you'll have a point.

And again, what the original (and oft reported in the past 4 years) report was:

Somehow these things that were "absolute nonsense" that's "not going to happen. Ever" have suddenly now become perfectly normal standard things to do.

It's rare that power grabs happen in a big moustache twirling gesture. Instead they happen one little unprecedented but legal step at a time.

It’s generally not so to use the DOJ to do it.

No, you said with the increase in mail in voting that the incidence of fraud is more likely:

It's important to point out there is no evidence of widespread fraud (or any that I'm aware of). Trump's challenges aren't substantive. Do you have some examples you'd like to share?

You mentioned 6000 votes. A google search turns up this.

It was an error that was caught during normal validation. Not fraud. Not even close. But it is a favorite theme among conspiracy theorists.

Who's going to count the signatures and check for fraud?

This appears to be exactly what is happening.

Because Trump is not Obama, or Bush, or Raegan, or even Nixon.

He's something that hasn't happened before under circumstances which haven't happened before. He doesn't follow the rules, the conventions or even typical form for corruption.

He is within his rights to demand a recount if he suspects fraud or error, sure, but by now you must realise his intentions are not that noble. This isn't about public service, it's about him regardless of the damage done.

You (and I mean you personally) have condemened foreign (read socialist) leaders as corrupt dictators on the basis of far less. If this were Venezuala or Bolivia you'd long since have made up your mind.

Tell me you see that at this point?

After reading that article I am even more convinced US election officials have run one of the most transparent elections in history. We should be commending their hard work.

He was on Laura Ingraham last night in a shadow with his voice changed saying he witnessed fraud firsthand as a poll worker. That's beyond legal means.

He's acting like a sore loser and a total douchebag.

Not presidential behaviour in the least. Defend that.

It seems pretty obvious to me that this election could have been a huge shit show and it wasn't, so yes, I agree.

Not going to defend it, since I think it's in vain. I'm only saying he's within the law.

WABvsUCH doesn't care about that, he just wants to be a grumpy old man and wants to shit on our country as much as possible. It's his MO.

Ooh you're in a foul mood today.

Nah, just stating the truth.

And that law says he's 0-12 in his legal cases, his own party's election officials say there's no corruption, and he's increasing the chance of violence and murder over his absolute and utter lies to salvage his ego.

I think we've all seen that anyone that's still with the GOP over all these years is either vastly ignorant or morally bankrupt.

But now it is beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are reprehensible at being patriots, too.

Yeah, it's been pretty clear for a while that to be Republican is to be anti-American.

No he didn't, that video is edited.

A black guy acts within the law by kneeling before a football game: This is an outrage, he's disrespecting the country, get rid of him now, he's sowing division!

Trump files dozens of legally dubious suits: He's acting within the law.

The first is my opinion, the second is a statement of fact.

It's not a question of whether he's acting within the law. The Republicans' not-quite-lame-duck appointment of ACB was legal, but it was a dick move nonetheless.

Dick moves is the currency of the realm these days. It was a dick move to end the filibuster on SCOTUS appointments, and it cost the Democrats dearly.

You are correct that it was a dick move, but it was McConnell and not Reid who killed the filibuster on SCOTUS appointees.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/neil-gorsuch-supreme-court-senate.html

You're right; my mistake. The Democrats eliminated the filibuster on federal court appointments.

But this statement...

...is still technically correct.

And the fact that so many on the American right have stronger opinions about the first than the second reveals very troubling facts.

I think the word you wanted was "delicate"

Yes, it is technically correct that McConnell's dick move was costly for Democrats. As it was presumably intended to be.

You're not really going to try to get from that to some kind of both-sidesism, are you?