• WoodScientist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    No, big turnout is still synonymous with a progressive candidate win.

    Again, you’re living in the past. Back during the era of Obama, it was Democrats who were drawing out the infrequent voters. When turnout was high, Democrats did well. Now, it’s Republicans who are relying on the infrequent voters. The modern Democrats are very dependent on college-educated voters and other groups that turn out more reliably than Trump’s base.

    And how Bernie or some other progressive would win is completely irrelevant here. We’re talking about how Kamala, a centrist Democrat, performed in an election. What happened 20 years ago is irrelevant. In the recent Trump elections - 2016, 2020, 2024, it is centrist Democrats like her who were hurt by higher turnout.

    However, that being said, there’s literally a laundry list of election interference issues that should trigger a recount. And that includes speech by Trump himself that is suspect. Like he’s literally working with Elon Musk and Putin and you don’t think they may have done some bullshit? Lol. How gullible. You realize Putin has decades of experience rigging elections and using propaganda, and Musk owns Twitter?

    Trump made a vague remark about having some plan in the House, a plan that they’ll never need. Do I doubt that Trump would willingly steal an election? No. But the point is that, as everyone has been trying to tell you, there is no reasonable way to pull off what you’re suggesting.

    You are naive and clearly trapped in an info bubble. The simple fact is that far more people voted for Trump than did Harris. And this result isn’t in any way surprising. It’s the kind of scenario any Poli Sci 101 text would tell you could easily lose an incumbent an election.

    If it were a close race at all, you would have a point. But we don’t do big national recounts just for shits and giggles. We don’t do them because you think someone’s vibe makes them a cheater. We do it when a plot is actually plausible. And the advantage Trump received is completely consistent with national polling, general economic sentiments, and Trump’s own past poll performance. There is simply no reason other than cope to hang onto the idea that Trump cheated his way to this win.

    • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      Look, you seem to think I’m making an argument for how things definitely were. I’m not. I’m making an argument for why we should do a recount, and if the recount is accurate, why I think Dems lost.

      You, on the other hand, have written a host of assumptions and attempts to convince me of some story. You won’t. I demand a recount, it’s only fair. Things have been suspicious enough that I want a recount. I will advocate for this. That’s my right while I still have freedom of speech. So suck an egg, we recounters aren’t going to shut up.

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        Well, feel free to keep calling for a recount. And I’m free to tell you why there isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of it happening.

        • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          Wow, you should be really proud of yourself here, so brave and amazing of you to dismiss other’s legitimate concerns