4 ms·

Trump Fake Electors Plot

62 points by surprisetalk 8mo ago

piekvorst 8mo ago
How can one trust a dishonest, manipulative person?
- pickleglitch 8mo ago
  You can trust them to be dishonest and manipulative.
  - ortusdux 8mo ago
    It's a big reason why they were constantly accusing every opponent of being a crook. People don't want to vote for a crook, but if you convince enough voters that all politicians are dishonest and it is their only option, than they can rationalize voting for 'their' crook.
    - piva00 8mo ago
      Not very dissimilar to Mussolini's tactics back in the 1920s/1930s, it's actually quite impressive how many similarities there are between Trump's and Mussolini's ways to find political power.
outside1234 8mo ago
Just unbelievable that people voted for this guy again after this.
- blargthorwars 8mo ago
  Here in Washington Statue, we hardly elect Republicans. There are several reasons, but one of them is that the Republican Party runs really weird candidates. The two people who could have gotten Donald Trump elected ran against him. That's how bad the candidates the Democrats ran were: The voters would rather have Donald Trump.
  - 5555624 8mo ago
    > The voters would rather have Donald Trump. This is the point many people overlook. Biden won because a lot of voters said, "anyone but Trump" and Biden was acceptable. WaPo even pointed this out, just before Biden dropped out the anyone but Trump voters couldn't really accept Biden after the debate. Harris was not a strong candidate, especially after saying, on "The View," she said she would not change anything.
  - deleted 8mo ago
    [deleted]
  - outside1234 8mo ago
    That reads like racism to be honest (not you, but the general Washington voter, if true).
josefritzishere 8mo ago
It's amazing that so many people went to prison for this crime, but not the ringleader.
kevinfiol 8mo ago
It always amazes me how successfully this was swept under the rug and how few people I talk to know about this. The Jack Smith public hearing [1] was so damning, it is unbelievable how quickly the media and the public have moved on. In my mind, this disqualifies this president and his supporters from ever being taken in good faith. Not only did he put your representatives in danger on January 6, he actively did so in order to undermine the election. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z56_LJtERCI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z56_LJtERCI
- tim333 8mo ago
  Most of the stuff was public before the 2024 election but the US public decided to reelect Trump allowing him to stop the prosecutions. What are you going to do?
- recursivecaveat 8mo ago
  Crazy that Trump was literally recorded making a phone call to lean on an election official: "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" and was still reelected by the public.
pupppet 8mo ago
Hey HN Trump supporters, I know you're here, what's your spin on this?
- slater 8mo ago
  They're not going to respond. Can't let the mask slip (more than it already has)
- kevinfiol 8mo ago
  Usually, the strategy is to draw a false equivalence to the 1960 presidential election, specifically the recount in Hawaii [1][2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_United_States_presidential_election_in_Hawaii#Analysis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_United_States_presidentia... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_fake_electors_plot#1960_Hawaii_electors_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_fake_electors_plot#1960_...
  - AnimalMuppet 8mo ago
    But that really is a false equivalence, as you state. Hawaii created a slate of alternate electors, in case the recount changed the result. But only one slate was endorsed by the governor; only one slate was presented at the Electoral College. Having "alternate electors", who were not endorsed by the governor, and who didn't win the recount (or the court case), show up at the electoral college anyway, claiming to be the real thing... that is a whole different deal. It's not a good-faith contingency plan for if you win the recount; it's a bad-faith attempt to overthrow the vote after you lost the recount.
- eudamoniac 8mo ago
  Wikipedia is an aggregate of "reliable sources" (read: left wing media outlets) and as such cannot be trusted as a source of fact in political matters. My spin is that I don't trust most of the claims made in the article. For the sake of argument I will assume the article is entirely accurate. I don't care overmuch, honestly. I am not the biggest fan of democracy in general. It doesn't seem to work very well. China is running circles around us and they are not worried about voting for parties.
Mr_Eri_Atlov 8mo ago
And of course this was immediately flagged
mrtksn 8mo ago
Every accusation is a confession

62 points by surprisetalk 8mo ago

piekvorst 8mo ago

How can one trust a dishonest, manipulative person?

pickleglitch 8mo ago
You can trust them to be dishonest and manipulative.
- ortusdux 8mo ago
  It's a big reason why they were constantly accusing every opponent of being a crook. People don't want to vote for a crook, but if you convince enough voters that all politicians are dishonest and it is their only option, than they can rationalize voting for 'their' crook.
  - piva00 8mo ago
    Not very dissimilar to Mussolini's tactics back in the 1920s/1930s, it's actually quite impressive how many similarities there are between Trump's and Mussolini's ways to find political power.

outside1234 8mo ago

Just unbelievable that people voted for this guy again after this.

blargthorwars 8mo ago
Here in Washington Statue, we hardly elect Republicans. There are several reasons, but one of them is that the Republican Party runs really weird candidates. The two people who could have gotten Donald Trump elected ran against him. That's how bad the candidates the Democrats ran were: The voters would rather have Donald Trump.
- 5555624 8mo ago
  > The voters would rather have Donald Trump. This is the point many people overlook. Biden won because a lot of voters said, "anyone but Trump" and Biden was acceptable. WaPo even pointed this out, just before Biden dropped out the anyone but Trump voters couldn't really accept Biden after the debate. Harris was not a strong candidate, especially after saying, on "The View," she said she would not change anything.
- deleted 8mo ago
  [deleted]
- outside1234 8mo ago
  That reads like racism to be honest (not you, but the general Washington voter, if true).

josefritzishere 8mo ago

It's amazing that so many people went to prison for this crime, but not the ringleader.

kevinfiol 8mo ago

It always amazes me how successfully this was swept under the rug and how few people I talk to know about this. The Jack Smith public hearing [1] was so damning, it is unbelievable how quickly the media and the public have moved on. In my mind, this disqualifies this president and his supporters from ever being taken in good faith. Not only did he put your representatives in danger on January 6, he actively did so in order to undermine the election. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z56_LJtERCI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z56_LJtERCI

tim333 8mo ago
Most of the stuff was public before the 2024 election but the US public decided to reelect Trump allowing him to stop the prosecutions. What are you going to do?
recursivecaveat 8mo ago
Crazy that Trump was literally recorded making a phone call to lean on an election official: "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" and was still reelected by the public.

pupppet 8mo ago

Hey HN Trump supporters, I know you're here, what's your spin on this?

slater 8mo ago
They're not going to respond. Can't let the mask slip (more than it already has)
kevinfiol 8mo ago
Usually, the strategy is to draw a false equivalence to the 1960 presidential election, specifically the recount in Hawaii [1][2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_United_States_presidential_election_in_Hawaii#Analysis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_United_States_presidentia... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_fake_electors_plot#1960_Hawaii_electors_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_fake_electors_plot#1960_...
- AnimalMuppet 8mo ago
  But that really is a false equivalence, as you state. Hawaii created a slate of alternate electors, in case the recount changed the result. But only one slate was endorsed by the governor; only one slate was presented at the Electoral College. Having "alternate electors", who were not endorsed by the governor, and who didn't win the recount (or the court case), show up at the electoral college anyway, claiming to be the real thing... that is a whole different deal. It's not a good-faith contingency plan for if you win the recount; it's a bad-faith attempt to overthrow the vote after you lost the recount.
eudamoniac 8mo ago
Wikipedia is an aggregate of "reliable sources" (read: left wing media outlets) and as such cannot be trusted as a source of fact in political matters. My spin is that I don't trust most of the claims made in the article. For the sake of argument I will assume the article is entirely accurate. I don't care overmuch, honestly. I am not the biggest fan of democracy in general. It doesn't seem to work very well. China is running circles around us and they are not worried about voting for parties.

Mr_Eri_Atlov 8mo ago

And of course this was immediately flagged

mrtksn 8mo ago

Every accusation is a confession