KAMALA HARRIS

NotSpaghetti

You are right that things need to be transparent Urmstongran - but the whole system IS transparent as far as I can see.

You can't persuade people to think rationally if they are members of a cult, unfortunately.

I'm always minded at this point to recall the public on record phone calls Trump made to Raffensperger, who was actually a republican and in charge of the vote results

“According to the publicly released recording of the call and reports made by multiple news agencies, Trump attempted to pressure Raffensperger into reinvestigating the election results, despite being repeatedly told that there was no electoral error.

Trump's repeated efforts to convince Raffensperger to find some basis to overturn the election results were perceived as pleading and threatening.

At one point on the call, Trump told Raffensperger, "What I want to do is this. I just want to find, uh, 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have, because we won the state

During the call, Trump falsely suggested that Raffensperger could have committed a criminal offense by refusing to overturn the state's election results

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump–Raffensperger_phone_call

There's also this article which goes into every possible deal fact checking detailed accusations of fraud (warning, very long, but gives the gist).

www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/fact-check-trumps-georgia-call-raffensperger?ref=jom.media

I am inclined to feel sympathy for the thousands of ordinary US citizens who turn out to count the votes and make every effort to do so with honesty and commitment and yet get implicated in accusations.

Harris is a certainty for the Democrat nomination and I hope she beats the Felon by a landslide in the interests of the whole world.

AGAA4

Trump wants to take the USA back to segregation and no rights for women. He believes in white supremacy.
I have to hope that women will not vote for him. So many years of women fighting for their rights could be obliterated by Trump as Potus.

There seem to be plenty of women at his rallies. And women don’t always vote for women. There’s a long way to go, yet.

You are right that things need to be transparent Urmstongran - but the whole system IS transparent as far as I can see.

You can't persuade people to think rationally if they are members of a cult, unfortunately.

Apparently the fundraiser organisation "Blue Future" has had the phone ringing off the hook with people wanting to volunteer. Young people are energised by KH. I also think that the Democrats' stand on abortion and womens' freedom of choice will help their campaign.

It's starting to look good for the Democrats.

It is only because they are being constantly fed lies, and then appear to take it in without due critical thought.

But as I read recently.

It is all about feelings/emotion and nothing to do with facts/critical thought.

When people rely on their emotions without critical thought they are wide open to manipulation.

Frankly that way lies madness and 1984.

Apparently, then, it’s Trump supporters who think the system is broken, and, honestly, I am dead happy if they don’t vote as a result.

I agree Wyllow & NotSpaghetti

I didn’t say that. I just think that doubts were definitely raised and this time around people (voters) need full reassurance to pre-empt division.

“Some 35% of Americans—including 68% of Republicans—believe the Big Lie, pushed relentlessly by former President Donald Trump and amplified by conservative media, that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. They think that Trump was the true victor and that he should still be in the White House today.”

Source: The Atlantic.

This ‘perception’ means many voters will be wary. That’s why transparency is important.

Yes. Wyllow I thought so.

What a moving pic.

urms hand on heart etc. Do you truly believe that the election was stolen?

Forgive my (virtual) shouting, Urms

THE LAST ELECTION WAS FAIR AND THE MACHINES AND POSTAL BALLOTS WORKED PERFECTLY WELL

The result was correct, Trump’s alleged frauds and system failures did not happen, and his lies were proved false in court case after court case l, and none of those were rigged either.

Just for info: the deadline for overseas postal ballots (up to 3 million of them) his, in many states, several days after the election, and that’s not fraud either.

Urmstongran

Well, whatever the pros and cons of the candidates, I hope they keep a tight control of the voting machines and the postal ballot, this time.

Not only must the election be fair, it must be seen to be fair. Whatever one's views of the 2020 election, it will not be good if there are hundreds more affidavits attesting to voting irregularities in November.

Don’t you believe the reports saying that there was no issue?!

Murdoch was fined enormously because he disagreed with the findings, because by doing so he undermined the trust in democracy.

All those affidavits were looked at and found no case to answer.

Just been sent this:

There were four hundred and something lots found to be possible fraud - including, for example instances of genuine mistakes (one where a felon moved from a state where felons can vote to one where they can't but he went to vote as apparently he didn't realise it was different.
Lots of small "frauds" like this.

Generally though it seems fraud is pretty rare.
I doubt, however, that anything anyone can do or say will persuade people otherwise if they have decided it's widespread though.

www.reuters.com/article/fact-check/re-examining-how-and-why-voter-fraud-is-exceedingly-rare-in-the-us-ahead-of-th-idUSL1N2XP2AI/

Well, whatever the pros and cons of the candidates, I hope they keep a tight control of the voting machines and the postal ballot, this time.

Not only must the election be fair, it must be seen to be fair. Whatever one's views of the 2020 election, it will not be good if there are hundreds more affidavits attesting to voting irregularities in November.

Siope

Casdon as far as I understand it, others could have decided to stand (as happens normally, even if an incumbent stands for a second term). They would then - still could - solicit supporters (which is all an endorsement is) and campaigned, as Harris is campaigning still.

Agreed, it would been a short contest, as the nominee will be chosen at the Democratic convention in 3 weeks, but it would still have tested Harris somewhat.

WWM I think the argument is that a contest would test the truth of that, at least to some extent.

I don’t know if any other potential delegates have said they would have stood if the consensus hadn’t endorsed Harris Siope, from what I’ve read it sounds pretty unanimous. I don’t disagree that a contest would have been better, but I can understand why they have decided to go with her, too.

Merion that’s awkward, as so far, as far as I can tell, there is now no nominee. I’m off to pester barely awake Americans to help me make sense of it.

sipoe yes exactly so. Which is I think is where Obama is coming from, but it seems unlikely now as she appears to have sufficient nominations.

Pity really, as it would have legitimised her candidacy. They are too keen to get on with it.

Casdon as far as I understand it, others could have decided to stand (as happens normally, even if an incumbent stands for a second term). They would then - still could - solicit supporters (which is all an endorsement is) and campaigned, as Harris is campaigning still.

Agreed, it would been a short contest, as the nominee will be chosen at the Democratic convention in 3 weeks, but it would still have tested Harris somewhat.

WWM I think the argument is that a contest would test the truth of that, at least to some extent.

Casdon

It must be timing that prevents a contest Siope. Harris is endorsed already, but it would take several months to run a selection process, and as the election is so soon that would affect a new person’s chances if they are not well known?

All to do with Ohio which Rory Stewart was explaining in the latest TRIP. More here from NBC News. This piece predates Biden’s withdrawal but explains the dilemma and why Harris’s nomination needs to be be seen to be legitimate.

www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/democrats-virtual-nomination-biden-ohio-ballot-rcna154339

As others have said, Trump and his supporters, if defeated in November, are unlikely to take it well. What we don’t need is repeat of 6 January 2021.

Primrose53

Casdon

Let’s try and keep this thread free of nonsense one liner diss posts shall we, we aren’t in the fifth form.

Oh sorry, I hadn’t realised you run the show.
🤣🤣

I recently read a book called Coconut byFlorence Olajide.
Coconut is a term used to describe brown people (as in coconut shell) who reject their heritage for a white one.

And you think that post is relevant because……?

I was reading about Harris. Apparently her communication skills and the ability to relay her beliefs were too weak which lost her support in previous years, but she has learned on the job as it were and is now a much better communicator.

It must be timing that prevents a contest Siope. Harris is endorsed already, but it would take several months to run a selection process, and as the election is so soon that would affect a new person’s chances if they are not well known?