Why not more discussion of Greg Palast's compelling case that GOP stole 2016 election?

[CajunBlazer]

71. History shows little evidence that past conspiricy theories are factual

The vast majority of past conspiracy theories remained just that, conspiracy theories and they were thus eventually consigned to the trash bins of history. The few CT's that have turned out to be true - well, in the South we have saying for that, "Even a blind hog finds an acorn once and a while" or perhaps one with which you may be more familiar: Even a stopped clock is right twice a day".

And the Horseshoe Theory is valid in my opinion, especially at the extremes. For instance at the far left wing the USSR (founded on extreme left wing Communist principles) was virtually indistinguishable in its actions from far right wing dictatorships. But it also is reasonably valid as peoples' ideologies begin to depart significantly from the center. While their ideologies may be completely different, the behaviors of the far left and the far right in this country are too closely aligned to be coincidence. Those on the far right and the far left:

1) Both believe that they and they alone are ideologically pure and must maintain that purity. They both think that anyone who doesn't hold their ideological opinions must be wrong.

2) Both believe that those who claim to be on the same side of the ideological spectrum, but are more centralist have been at best "mislead". And it isn't unusually for those on the far left to label fellow progressives to their right "conservatives" while those on the far right often label conservatives to their left ideologically "liberals".

3) Both abhor making concessions and compromising because they "cannot in good conscious compromise their principles.

4) Both are usually not very successfully politically because those who are successful in politics compromise to get things done, and both lack the capacity to compromise.

5) Both often cling to conspiracy theories when they lose, because they know they are right and the other side is wrong. So how could the people on the side of right possibly lose unless the other side cheated.

(There are other similarities, but I don't want to bore you.)

And no, nothing I have written should leave anyone to believe that I mean to preclude investigations into situations which may be questionable. In fact I favor investigations because they get the truth out. Either conspiracy theories are proven to be correct (in which case they are no longer conspiracy theories) or they are proven wrong, as is usually the case. Of course in the case of the latter, some wing nuts will still come up with a new conspiracy theory that the investigation was tainted.

So, I am more than happy with the recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. I don't think that the election results will be reversed in any of those state, but even, so if they are done correctly it will be add even more credibility to the American Election system.

What I do have a problem with is people giving voice to conspiracy theories when they don't have a shred of evidence to back up their opinions and all they really have is questionable situations which haven't been investigated. It is more than okay to point out that things in a certain situation don't seem to add up and to insist on an investigation. That is even laudable. However, for people to point to a situation that doesn't look right and and insist that there was cheating though they have no evidence at all is reprehensible. And I will continue to call them out on it.