559
Trump Is Pissed at True Reports His Victory Wasn’t Exactly a Landslide (newrepublic.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/politics@lemmy.world
78 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Summary

Donald Trump and his team are attacking media outlets like Politico and The New York Times for reporting that his 2024 election victory over Kamala Harris was narrow, not a “landslide.”

Trump won by 1.6 points and failed to secure a majority of the popular vote, a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton’s over him in 2016.

Despite these facts, Trump and his allies continue to tout his win as “historic” and “dominant,” aiming to bolster his political mandate amid criticisms that his victory was less decisive than claimed.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 182 points 2 years ago (1 child)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 22 points 2 years ago

    Wow, that makes more sense in politics than it does in quantum mechanics

    …

    Maybe we can model the quantum world on Politics.

    every time a politician has to make a statement he both agrees and disagrees until he knows who the audience.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 88 points 2 years ago

    Remember that his first official act as president in his first term was to send Sean Spicer out, literally on day one, to scold the press corp for seeing the paltry crowd at his inauguration. This guy is always, always just small dick energy in an ill-fitting suit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 48 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Piss on him til he fucking drowns

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • [–] 35 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Every election in America, no matter how shitty Republicans get, is 49%-51%.

    This produces a rather odd dumbass effect where if it's 48%-52%, people start shouting about landslides.

    (About that basically always tied thing...)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 34 points 2 years ago

    I mean if you take into account how stupid and incompetent he was in his last term and that he now he seems to be losing his faculties it was quite a landslide. Getting 10% should have been a miracle.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 33 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (28 children)

    There's even rumors that votes in the swing states were fraudulent as well. A disproportionate number of "bullet ballots" in swing states alone may indicate foul going-ons. The only way to tell would be a recount, however.

    Edit: Seems the info is dubious, at best. Partially straight up wrong. Oh well. A few hours of hope was nice.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 28 child comments
    •
  • [–] 86 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    This has been shut down pretty well at this point.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    How? If there's new info I want to hear it but AFAIK it's been speculated and nobody has done any digging on it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    If there was anything to it, the Democrats would be talking about it. They have plenty of lawyers that can demand recounts in places where they suspect they could gain something. I know they're generally incompetent, but not that incompetent.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (3 children)
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (1 reply)
    • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 47 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    According to snopes, the claims made by the Spoonamore guy are kinda iffy, I'm afraid. :(

    https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/11/21/stephen-spoonamore-letter-harris/

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    I read that earlier and I'm confused why it seems to matter if the vote is above the threshold for the state to flip or not to do a recount.

    Take Nevada: " As for Nevada, Spoonamore contended in his letter, "NV - 43K+ 5.5%+ of Trump's total vote. Enough to exceed recount threshold." The Nevada government website (archived) reported that — out of 1,487,887 total ballots cast — 1,484,840 ballots contained votes for presidential candidates and 1,464,728 contained votes for U.S. Senate candidates. The mximum number of "bullet votes" is 23,159. Trump received 46,008 more votes in Nevada than Harris. "

    Snopes seems to be saying that it doesn't matter if Trump cheated and sneaked in 23k bullet votes because Kamala would have lost anyway without them. In my view, if ANY cheating occured then that's like really bad right? Even if it didn't flip the election?

    23k is a little more than half of 43k so the percentage would drop from 5.5% down to 2.8% which is still wayyy over the usual 0.05% bullet ballots which seems very odd and makes it recount worthy. (Note: The 0.05% bullet ballots figure comes from the original article which I haven't fact checked since idk how so if that's wrong please correct it "In comparison, bullet ballots for Trump in Oregon, Utah and Idaho—the three states which border Arizona and Nevada, with equally fervent Trump voters—count for less than 0.05% in each state.")

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Even ignoring the math, the assertion that a statistically unlikely amount of bullet ballots means there has been fraud is kinda out there. Historically, bullet ballots are fairly common with populist candidates.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago

    Oh, thanks for that link. They did go really deep into the numbers with this one. I knew the whole Starlink part of the letter made no sense given how the internet works, but I still had questions about the number of bullet ballots, which Snopes addresses as well state by state.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago

    I think that's all BS. However, what is not BS is that ballots have just "vanished", due to being challenged by the Vigilante stuff. According to Greg Pallast, investigative journalist with the BBC, there have been over 800k provisional ballots that have not been counted because they have been thrown out. He even has the exact names of people, who's ballots have been thrown out.

    If it wasn't so dire, I'd find it extremely fascinating...

    https://youtu.be/X3hXeEiFcJM

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    Problematic for a couple of reasons:

    1. You can't just insert fake ballots, that would cause the vote count to be incorrect when compared to registered voters.

    2. A bullet ballot would support Trump, but have no impact on other races... races which we know Republicans won.

    Looking at Pennsylvania as an example:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election_in_Pennsylvania

    Trump - 3,542,505
    Harris - 3,421,088
    Stein - 34,508
    Oliver - 33,299
    Total - 7,031,400
    Trump won by 121,417

    Now compare that to the Senate election:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_election_in_Pennsylvania

    McCormick - 3,395,785
    Casey - 3,378,356
    Libertarian - 89,475
    Green - 66,185
    Constitution - 23,586
    Total - 6,953,384

    So 78,016 more people voted in the Presidential race than the Senate race, which is not enough to have given Trump the win if they were all bullet ballots.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago* (8 children)

    You don't have to fake ballots. You can just throw absentee ballots out, after them being challenged...which happens since 2000 (it's apparently one of the reasons Bush won), this time however there have been over 800k ballots that have been thrown out...in swing states alone.

    Considering the margins are so slim, a few 100k challenged voters here and there...and you have "We don't need your votes, we have enough" https://youtu.be/X3hXeEiFcJM

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    That isn't the claim though. The claim is enough "bullet ballots" (Trump only ballots) had been inserted to flip the election.

    Elections don't work that way. I was telling people the same thing in 2016 and 2020.

    When people cast a vote, it's tied to a registration. If you insert a bunch of votes, you end up with more ballots than voters.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    counting machines could be compromised and doing an office space thing in targeted areas, flipping one democrat vote for every 10 counted. no one would question it. only a hand count would verify, and those aren't usually done anymore.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    So, not to say I necessarily believe in this, but the case laid out has a lot to do with Elon's PAC, which was collecting only names and addresses with the promise that voters would be paid x amount after taking some sort of pledge. The argument then follows, that if electronic tabulation systems were hacked and continuously connected to the Internet, the people who signed up to his list could have their vote automatically cast as a bullet ballot for Donald Trump. Supposedly, there's a way they could do this digital ballot stuffing specifically for voters whose ballot had not shown up as cast within the voter registry past a certain point in time, so all the fraudulent ballots look like legitimate ones tied to actual people.

    It's pretty far-fetched, but just plausible enough that it's appealing to a lot of people who were blindsided by election day's results

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    load more comments (1 reply)
    • [–] 21 points 2 years ago

    Facts don’t care about his feelings.

    The gaslighting of his campaign knows no bounds.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 21 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Yeah, he is afraid that it will be exposed that he rigged this election.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
    load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 20 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Trump runs on ego. Anything that quells the ego must be wrong.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    This is the only effective way to slow him down imo. Make fun of him for having small crowds at his rallies then sue him for libel when he says his were bigger. It doesn't matter if it goes anywhere in court, you just need to force the conversation to keep his attention.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    I kinda knew the popular vote thing would correct itself, I think the reason it’s this close at all is because most people don’t pay attention to politics as much as they should

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
    • [–] 8 points 2 years ago

    Once he's president he'll probably say these types of stories are subversion of the state.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 6 points 2 years ago

    Yeah, well, this dickbird is already in and our chances of ever being able to legitimately get rid of him are, alas, extremely remote.

    So this is only a problem in his own petty little smooth brain. And yet.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    Ballots have just "vanished", due to being challenged by the Vigilante stuff. According to Greg Pallast, investigative journalist with the BBC, there have been over 800k provisional ballots that have not been counted because they have been thrown out. He even has the exact names of people, who's ballots have been thrown out.

    If it wasn't so dire, I'd find it extremely fascinating...

    https://youtu.be/X3hXeEiFcJM

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    I'm going to go with the Big Lie 2 here. Trump lost the popular vote just like he did with Hilary and Biden.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    load more comments
    view more: next ›