Why is it so difficult for us to think the election was stolen?

[planetc]

We have: the Russian theory, the weak candidate theory, the sexism theory, the candidate's unbalanced message theory, the candidate's lack of pizzazz theory. We have theories out the kazoo to explain an election result that surprised *everybody*. Why is it so difficult to think, even for a moment, that somebody just stole the election? This time, it was not just the exit polls, but most of the opinion polls before the election. Nate Silver miscalled the election??? What if Nate, and the other poll readers, and the exit pollers all called the voters' intentions and actions RIGHT? Mr. Trump's victory hangs on razor thin margins in three (or more) states. Is electoral college arithmetic difficult? It can be mastered if you can add and subtract. Is it difficult to hack an optical scanner? It's easy. What is riding on the outcome of this election? An awful lot of tax payer money. Do we think our political opponents are such principled people and so scrupulous of our voting rights (stop laughing! ) that they*would never do such a thing*??? Republicans spend half their time between elections trying to minimize Democratic votes in the next election. By vote suppression measures of all kinds. Do we imagine that when voting day finally arrives, they cease all nefarious action and do their best to count every vote, including Democratic votes? What are we, crazy? In April of this year, Congressional Republicans refused to consider Pres. Obama's candidate for the Supreme Court vacancy until after the election. Mere recalcitrance? Or did they know the fix was in?

Dr. Stein's efforts to get recounts, or audits, or any confirmation at all of the accuracy of the announced vote totals were met by vigorous resistance from Republican lawyers, and those failed efforts made one thing clear. We CAN'T get a meaningful recount because of a maze of state laws, the Bush v. Gore decision, the antiquity of some voting machines, and the colossal expense of hand recounting ballots. Only a few blessed states could have responded adequately to a request for a recount because only a few are using paper ballots hand counted. ONLY those few states could have said: "Sure, it'll take us about a week." We are left to conclude, if we are honest, that our presidential elections are unverifiable. We have just spent 18 months of our lives spending hundreds of millions of dollars on campaigning, and often hanging on the results of every opinion poll that came out, and we CAN'T be sure of who was elected? Or, in other words, are we crazy?

Forget the Russians, who certainly seem to have played a role in yet more anti-Clinton propaganda. Why look at the Kremlin's hackers when we have perfectly competent hackers at home?

Please, I beg of you, stop whipping yourselves for one moment, and think aloud: "But what if they just stole it? Again?"

[Richard D]

1. I pretty much figured it was being stolen

When DU went down on election day.

[Madam45for2923]

2. Yes, I found that suspicious too!

[CountAllVotes]

11. esp. the nature of that hack

Did you happen to see any of it?

Being gay in Russia is a crime and that hack had some language that ran through it re: being gay.

So, yeah, I think it was stolen alright!

[Richard D]

24. The "God Emperor Trump"

got to me. So weird.

[CountAllVotes]

46. I thought the faces w/the red lips on them

That was damn sight creepy IMO.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

13. Coinkidink??... I don't think so!!

[brush]

29. It was stolen by calculating just where and how many votes to swing the electoral college

And out next big effort should be to get rid of the electoral college, a compromise from the days of slavery to get slave states to stay in the union.

They were given an advantage over more populous northern states by being able to count enslaved black people — but only by counting them as 3/5s of a man.

We have to start yelling it out that we are still going along with this vestige from slavery which is still benefiting white supremacists.

Let's campaign loudly to get rid of this antiquated racist compromise so that the real majority vote-getter wins everytime

[blue cat]

33. I thought that too

The timing was most suspicious. And they were in your face Russian. Didn't try to hide it one bit. That makes me fighting mad. I find myself resenting people that I know that voted for him. The only way that I'll make it through these next 4 years is the DU, because you all rock!!!

[triron]

34. the comradery helps

thanks

[uponit7771]

42. +1

[LaydeeBug]

65. me too! Really it started for me the day before, when Trump was announcing Cabinet picks. nt

[putitinD]

3. it was stolen.

[planetc]

4. Well, that's four of us. So far, so good. eom

[Madam45for2923]

5. It was stolen.

[True_Blue]

6. They stole it.

[Coyotl]

8. It is very easy to think and to see.

[triron]

19. Worth a thousand words

[chimpymustgo]

47. This. All the GOP cares about is money and power. Look at what they do in the light of day: NC coup

attempt; voter suppression, gerrymandering.

They will do whatever it takes to win. They stole Senate and House seats, too. We will never get any semblance of power back. America, as we knew it is OVER.

It BAFFLES me that EVERYBODY'S hair is NOT on FIRE!!

[zippythepinhead]

62. mine is

itt was a double whammy for me. I live in NC.

[Guilded Lilly]

7. Cynic alert: Frankly, I think EVERYONE in politics...

has baggage they don't want exposed about their own dealings.
The corruption and fear of exposure of that has got to run very deep.
What is really in it for them?
They are all at that level, making enough money and getting enough lifetime perks that they aren't as scared, life threatened or stressed as the hundred millions of us who struggle to scratch out a decent life under their incompetence.
It is all a giant board game.
We lose most of the time.

[planetc]

16. Never any need to apologize for cynicism ...

on DU. And you're right that money infects our politics. Campaign financing the way we do it is legalized bribery. But all this can be changed if we can make our elections responsive to the will of the people.

That's an enormous if, of course.

[CanonRay]

9. We just don't want it to be true

because that implications of that are far too disturbing. We don't think of that even being possible in this country. Yet here we are.

[onecaliberal]

10. It was absolutely stolen.

[Kotya]

12. Stolen elections require an entirely different post mortem

than elections that were lost.

Because if the election was stolen, then Hillary Clinton's message and strategies need not be changed for future Democratic campaigns. Resources instead need to be concentrated on election integrity.

So which was it?

[planetc]

14. You're right.

Hillary Clinton's clean, sane campaign probably won the electoral vote as well as the popular vote.

But if the presidential election was rigged, then state elections can be rigged. There are four suspicious senatorial elections this year. How many have there been in past years? In short, how can we be sure how many of members of congress were elected and how many were "appointed" by hackers. How much of our congress is legitimate? What is the balance of power in congress *really*, that is, according to the will of the people?

I think we have to stop thinking that every elective loss means we did something wrong, and find out how democratic our democracy is. That, at this moment in time, will require a kind of revolution. And so be it, because it's our only choice.

[triron]

18. Yes you are right on (see my other post here-

applies to down ballot as well)

[uponit7771]

43. +1

[Laffy Kat]

15. We should be used to it by now. 2000, anyone? nt

[triron]

17. Also see Prof. Ron Baiman's

statistical analysis of the exit polls vs vote tallies in 28 states, 24 of which favored Trump.
While it's plausible for exit polls to be off why are 24 out of 28 off in the same direction, some by very large (~8-10%) amounts all again toward Trump. Statistically so improbably as to be virtually impossible.

[ElementaryPenguin]

20. No question in my mind it was stolen!!

Quote from Baiman's report:

...In this case, in 24 out of the 26 states where UEP data was publicized, the Trump VC margin exceeded the Trump UEP margin.
If 2016 UEP were random as it should be for unbiased exit polls, the chance of “red shift” for every state would be 50% or 0.5. The odds of negative red shift in 24 out of 26 such state UEP results would then be 1 in 13,110, or the odds of getting 24 heads in 26 coin tosses,

How often have you flipped a coin 26 times - and gotten HEADS 24 TIMES?

Most likely hacked by Russians, but it may well have been the GOP - or a combination thereof.

Russians bragged just a couple days after the election about their contact with the Trump campaign (clearly a message to Trump informing him that he was the victim of Putin's blackmail and had better cooperate.)
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/11/10/russian-officials-were-in-contact-with-trump-during-campaign.html?via=desktop&source=copyurl

[triron]

22. I believe it is 24 out of 28

which equals the odds you quote. 24 out of 26 is far less likely, less than 1 in 200000.

[ElementaryPenguin]

23. I just cut and pasted it from the report...

But thanks for that detail... - 1 in 200,000 is impressive. Even the 1 in 13,500 odds they used would mean - in US election terms - would mean we could expect such a Presidential election once every 54,000 years. (24 out of 26 would make it once every 800,000 years!)

I'd say there was serious hacking going on - perhaps the cellular connectivity for the vote tabulators was a major factor?

President Obama is not going to disclose this now - but I can't believe Drumpf can publicly humiliate the CIA - and the facts of the hacking and his team's collusion/communication - not come out at some point - maybe within the next several months or so??

[triron]

26. Another important numerical statistic

from this report of raw exit poll data are the sample sizes, especially is some important swing
states like North Carolina, Florida, and Ohio where sample sizes were 3967, 3941, and 3190 respectively. These sample are much larger than almost all polls done pre-election and thus are very robust for two reasons 1)taken after vote cast, 2)large sample size reducing expected error (from true result). If one considers the universe of states to be only the swing states (including wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, and Arizona) 12 out of 12 went toward Trump. That's 1 chance on 4096.
Not remotely plausible.

[Grey Lemercier]

21. It was absolutely stolen, and we will, I fear, end up doing nothing but watch our 60 years plus

battle for civil rights of all sorts be profoundly flushed down the loo.

[mvd]

25. Yes, I think it was. Some of it we have proof of, like..

The Russian involvement, the voter suppression, and the rogue FBI including Comey. This was all helped by a corporate media only interested in focusing on Hillary e-mails. While we still lack proof of the vote being hacked, I suspect that happened also. Exit polls were way off, and we had a bizarre result with almost 3 million popular vote lead and losing the EC. Republicans resisted the recounts, and those that were done could have been manipulated a second time.

We do need to talk about getting a stronger message and resisting the Repukes more, but this was not a fair election.

[mtnsnake]

27. Good points. For all we know, all the outrage over the Russians

could have been fueled by Republicans to cover up a much bigger, much more sinister rigging of the election by the right wing themselves.

[planetc]

31. Yeah, it strikes me that the Russians are a distraction from horrendous problems in the voting ...

...process itself. And we cannot do an adequate recount. We cannot verify whether 75,000 "empty ballots" actually were.

I repeat, we are being conned, by the media. There is no reason why I should believe the announced results, and fifty reasons why I should want to have it proven to me. But it can't be proven.

It's a Potemkin democracy.

[chimpymustgo]

48. I do fear this. It's a horrible charade that has become really dangerous for the non-1%.

I am terrified.

[KT2000]

28. they stole it it so many ways

that focusing on just one way would not tell the story. The wagons were circled - starting with the bashing of Hillary Clinton decades ago.

[planetc]

49. Also the bashing last year and this year.

Many media types are true believers in the evilness of Bill and Hillary Clinton. But these reporters are supposed to be bringing us news, facts, statements, proposed and passed bills in congress. On the Clintons, however, we get endless repetitions of the supposed deficiencies in their characters, daily references to scandals and baggage, and the occasional unfortunate phrase from 1996. It's the same poisoned personality syndrome that the right wing likes to use. Robert Byrd was briefly a member of the KKK in his youth: nothing he did or said afterward could ever redeem him, in their eyes. We wind up talking about personalities, not policy. It is so easy, so self-righteous, so wasteful of time and attention.

[mythology]

30. For one thing, there's no evidence for that theory

I try to always follow the actual evidence rather than a fantasy.

[LenaBaby61]

32. Why is it so difficult for us to think the election was stolen?

I Absolutely feel that the 2018 GE was stolen planetc. Whether it was cyber-hacking (Courtesy of tRump's boy toy putin tang), to GOP-led voter suppression/disfranchisement to our OWN FBI getting way too involved with Hillary Clinton and that trumped-up email situation, and per Pres. Kennedy etc., etc., etc., we've seen the FBI and our own CIA in action before.




I mean, good Lord, the Warren Commission wants us all to believe that the 35th president of the United States of America was assassinated by a lone hack in a book suppository over 200 feet away with diminishing marksman skills, a rickety rifle and a magic bullet while he (President Kennedy) was in a moving presidential motorcade?

Yeah, I'll just leave that Warren Commission "fantasy" right there

[Exilednight]

35. There is two ways to look at it.

The first way is what got us into Iraq. You can create your hypothesis then look for the evidence to support it, which is what many seem to be doing.

The second way is to look at the evidence and then develop a hypothesis.

[triron]

36. Also depends on both

what one considers 'evidence' and what evidence one chooses to look at.

For instance I consider statistics to be evidence. Some people don't.

[Exilednight]

37. Statistical evidence is the worst kind of evidence.

People who do not understand statistics often read too much into them and twist the stats to fit their belief.

I often see it on this board with people claiming voter suppression of minorities. One problem with this claim, if you REALLY look at the statistics it shows that voter turnout was down across the board from both parties and every demographic - save one.

[triron]

39. Then why is it so widely used in the sciences

and in medicine? Strange that scientists all over the world would use statistics for so much of their research.

[Exilednight]

45. Big difference.

Those studies are done by trained staticians. They're conducting blind studies in a controlled environment with a strictly controlled set of parameters.

[planetc]

50. The studies of the "red shift" are also done by trained statisticians.

And conditions in voting precincts across the country are rather messy, but they are only doing one thing: counting votes. Addition, subtraction, ballot tampering. On the cover of "Witness to a Crime: A Citizens' Audit of an American Election," there's a photo of a ballot with a sticker over a Kerry vote and the oval above filled in for Bush. Dr. Phillips personally audited the 2004 election in Ohio, and at least two people went to jail. Unfortunately, the convictions were long after Mr. Bush was inaugurated.

I would like to declare an Election Emergency, effective 11/9/16, and stop our stupid zombie march toward inauguration. The truth can be established, and the time is now.

[Exilednight]

51. Dr Philips is a doctor of?

What exactly does a picture on a book prove?

[planetc]

57. I urge you to look up Dr. Phillips' book

He is a Ph. D. specialist in karst hydrology, and has been called as an expert witness in that field and in election tampering.

This particular picture, if found in the keeping of an election canvasser sworn to uphold election law, might prove a great deal. I have no idea what evidence was used against the two election officials, but some was found. This was perhaps lucky, because a large number of "unused" ballots in Ohio were shredded or otherwise lost after the election. Despite a federal court order to preserve them.

One conclusion I've drawn from Dr. Phillips' book is that it is risky and dangerous to destroy evidence. In itself, it's probably a crime. How well do you think ballots in Wisconsin and Michigan are faring right now? Pennsylvania is a different case, of course, because many machines there had no paper records to keep or lose.

Do you really think this is a good way to run a national election?

[dionysus]

66. If we anulled the election, it'd cause a revolt and we'd look like facists. You don't have proof of

anything.

This is hillary's lifetime goal, if there was anything indicating theft she'd be all over it. She's no wilting daisy.

If there was any real indication of fraud she'd be all over it...

[triron]

55. Ron Baiman is a trained statistician.

Science/medicine attempt to control some conditions, etc. but not all. It is impractical if not impossible.
Exit polls attempt to control as many variables as practical. When 12 out of 12 swing states trend toward one candidate, something smells.

[egduj]

38. I think it's the whole boy/wolf story.

When every lost election since 1984 is accused of being stolen, people start getting numb to the whole idea.

But in that story, there actually was a wolf...

[TheFrenchRazor]

40. yes; we need all paper ballots, all hand-counted, all the time. nt

[MaeScott]

41. Of course it was stolen. Our vote was "hacked" in so many ways....

Gutting the voting rights act,gerrymandering,election machine rigging, crosscheck, fake news propaganda, so many ways.

[Orsino]

44. All our elections are stolen, to varying degrees.

Given the open buying of influence inherent in modern campaigns, I don't see why anyone would try to argue that 2016 was somehow an exception.

The theft is always there, to the extent that our laws and the lax enforcement thereof permit.

[StevieM]

52. To me the state to look to on this matter is actually Iowa.

Last edited Sun Dec 18, 2016, 02:05 PM - Edit history (1)

Trump won by 9 points. A 9 point win in Iowa indicates that it is believable that he won by the margins he won by in other states that were much closer.

So if Iowa was hacked than that might make the claim of hacking credible. But Iowa uses paper ballots and their machines are never hooked up to the internet. So the hypothetical operation by the Russians would have had to be unbelievably sophisticated.

Iowa allows a hand recount for up to 22 months. So verification can be achieved, which in my mind, would put the matter to rest.

The election was stolen by voter suppression laws. The election was stolen by a corrupt FBI Director.

[triron]

54. Iowa is just one state

I think there were multiple reasons for the 'stolen' election. The 2 you mention are not all of them.

I looked up voting in Iowa. While paper ballots are used it appears that optical scanners are used in many precincts. https://sos.iowa.gov/elections/pdf/covotesystem.pdf

Iowa would make an interesting study nevertheless.

[HoneyBadger]

53. I think that polling has taken on a life of its own

And can no longer be accepted. Pollsters disagreed with each other for the entire election. And who nailed it? Michael Moore? That tells me that polls are worthless.

[Rex]

56. I have no problems with it, clearly 2000 and 2004 were stolen as well.

Sadly, many lack the critical thinking skills needed to survive in this century. Years of Going Along to Get Along left them lacking in that department.

[Paladin]

58. The 2016 "election."

It stays in quotes from now on, as far as I'm concerned. I have no doubts it was stolen, none whatsoever.

[triron]

59. I as well

[Kentonio]

60. Because it makes us complacent and lazy.

Did Russia interfere in the election? Yeah probably. Should it have been enough to tip the balance? Oh hell no.

We put ourselves in a position where it became possible to manipulate the result. This was an election that should have been so one sided that all the FBI announcements, Russian interference or electoral shenanigans in the world couldn't have changed the result.

Basically we were handed the most precious gift of a lifetime, threw it against a wall, and are now complaining that it broke because the gift wrapping wasn't thick enough.

[Iamaartist]

61. I agree

I knew the election was going to be stolen before it even started,he kept saying it was going to be rigged ....when we got rigged instead , I live in Mich ,so I knew it was rigged...The GOP had it planned to take over America cant anybody tell with all the billionaires in his cabinet....the Dems where heading for a big win ...the GOP stopped it plain and simple and stole it..... the GOP is corrupt ...always has been but yet its hard for people to see this,,,,,not us at home here it was stolen for sure,,,,,

[MoonRiver]

63. Stolen

Many, many of us have been warning about paperless voting machines since 2001. Dem leadership ignored the clear warning signs, and here we are.

[zippythepinhead]

64. to anyone who believes this election was not stolen

I have some prime real estate in Chernobyl, Russia I would like to sell you. If not, eat shit.