Election 2020

[pbrower2a]

(12-12-2020, 06:02 PM)CH86 Wrote:

(12-12-2020, 05:43 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: The question is what the conservative opponents of Donald Trump do. Maybe they take over an existing Third Party (Reform? Constitution?) or form their own. Maybe they take over weak Democratic Parties in some states (let us say Oklahoma) and offer some different, more coherent, form of conservatism as an alternative.   

Democracy needs a contest between viable liberal or social-democratic parties and a viable conservatism, both of which have principles higher than 'sticking it' to their opposition. Much of the problem is that the conservative side of the American political system has installed power above principle and service. That must change. It may be the 2024 election makes that clear.

But the Reason the conservatives are stubbornly trying to block the results isn't because of some unreasonable conservative opposition to democracy, But because the liberal side is forcing through radical SJWs as their nominees. Trump would have had no problem conceding if Bernie/Tulsi had won the primary and subsequently won the election. However the DNC cheated in order to force feed their "Culture Wars" candidate and made their intentions crystal clear by making the most prominent advocates of SJW authoritarian "Liberalism" their VP choice. Why do you think there was such intense opposition to her candidacy throughout the 2020 primary and veepstakes, and intense opposition to Hillary's campaign in 2016 for that matter. The So-called "moderate" democrats are clearly the real radicals and that has been clear for the last 5 years.

Wrong. 

First, let us call them what they really are: semi-fascists. They show a disdain for democracy unless it serves their ends.  "Democracy" that works only in the service of one political side? That is simply a cover for dictatorship, as is typical in fascist, Commie, and Ba'athist states. Iran has that sort of 'democracy'. People have been executed in Iran for saying things that the regime does not like.

The conservatives that I used to know in American politics had a respect for tradition. One part of the American political tradition is that we accept political results that we dislike even if after the fact we despise and ridicule some of the politicians that we end up with.  This effort to set aside electoral results because one dislikes them is contrary to that tradition. The 2020 Presidential election is fair and clean, run in accordance with the sorts of controls of electoral devices and materials as well as auditing tests of the integrity of the polls (as in the number of voters and ballots is essentially identical, that procedures that stop absentee ballots from being counted if the voter is dead are in place). In my township the clerk reads the obituaries to strike the name of the deceased from the list of eligible voters. Both Parties have insisted upon rigorous methods to ensure the integrity of the election and have gotten their wish. 

The changes in electoral rules were approved before voting was underway, and they were changed to ensure that people could vote without fear of contracting COVID-19. From what I understand, my community required people to wear face masks while voting. So more people voted than usual? Expansion of the electorate by lawful procedure  is better than holding an election in a climate of undue danger.    
   
Claiming that Trump would not have  sought to overturn the election had some other Democrat won is bunk. It is not up to him to decide which opponent is the one to which he will concede. If a political leader can choose his opponent, then such is not democracy. 

Furthermore, it is not up to any state official to veto the voting result of another state. Neither is it acceptable for a state legislature or a Governor to nullify the result of an election in favor of a result of his choosing. Texas has no control over voting in Pennsylvania!