[finndark]

The government should have investigated it. The media have poor access to voting procedures and ballots and are unable to properly investigate. They can only question.

The Stalin misquote is difficult to deny: "It doesn't matter how people vote as long as [those in power] count the votes."

Also few, if any, election results were truly audited.

There was undeniably fraud. E.g., in Pennsylvania mail-in ballots had mismatched signatures, ballots were accepted beyond the law's limiting dates, ballots with no date were accepted, etc.The fraud was committed by Democratic-party supporting voters, judges and local voting officials.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2020/12/07/mark-l...

Mail-in ballots are an invitation to fraud and now that the Democrats got away with it bigtime in 2020 the floodgates will open in 2022 and 2024 producing a flood of fraudulent mail-in votes in other states where Dems will do their best to pass and modify (by legislative fiat or court order) similar mail-in voting laws.

The sitting president simply told it like it was.

[clouddrover]

> The government should have investigated it.

Governments did investigate it. That's what an election audit is.

The presidential election in Georgia is a good example of this. Georgia's election result from November was counted three times over. Georgia is confident the result is correct.

Nevertheless, Trump attempted to get the government of Georgia to commit election fraud for him. He wanted them to "find" an extra 11,780 votes for him.

Listen to the full one hour of Trump's phone call on the 2nd of January to Georgia's secretary of state Brad Raffensperger for yourself:

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/04/politics/donald-trump-geo...

Luckily for America, the government of Georgia stood up to Trump's attempt at election fraud and did not go along with it.

> The sitting president simply told it like it was

No. He has done nothing but lie to you.

[Izkata]

> Georgia's election result from November was counted three times over. Georgia is confident the result is correct.

> Nevertheless, Trump attempted to get the government of Georgia to commit election fraud for him. He wanted them to "find" an extra 11,780 votes for him.

Not quite true - that's the misleading summary people have been spreading, started by an out-of-context clip of the conversation. He wasn't trying to find extra votes, he was trying to find and validate votes which he believed could add up to 11,780 disqualified. Just re-counting the votes does not do this, those ballots would simply have been counted each time.

Two of the relevant quotes from the transcript:

> You had out-of-state voters. They voted in Georgia but they were from out of state, of 4,925. You had absentee ballots sent to vacant, they were absentee ballots sent to vacant addresses. They had nothing on them about addresses, that's 2,326.

> The other thing, dead people. So dead people voted and I think the number is close to 5,000 people. And they went to obituaries. They went to all sorts of methods to come up with an accurate number and a minimum is close to about 5,000 voters.

[clouddrover]

> Not quite true - that's the misleading summary people have been spreading, started by an out-of-context clip of the conversation.

It's not out of context. Listen to the full hour of the phone call. Trump is told repeatedly his claims are false.

[Izkata]

Whether or not he was told his claims are false, I quoted some of the missing context in my comment above. That context is why the shorter clip and summary of the conversation was misleading and wrong.

[clouddrover]

It's not misleading and it's not wrong. He made his goal clear. Listen to the full one hour of the phone call.

[Izkata]

Please read my comments, I read the transcript. There's a link to it from your link. Unless you're saying CNN is outright making stuff up?

[arolihas]

He won’t listen to this, he’ll make up some excuses of it being out of context.

[arolihas]

To those who downvoted, was I wrong? He straight up ignored it.

[arolihas]

If only Trump had you as a lawyer, your airtight evidence could’ve been brought to court.

[arolihas]

Did my comment break some guideline? If you find it problematic, please reply and explain to me what’s wrong instead of downvoting. I would greatly appreciate it, thank you.

[nitrogen]

Did my comment break some guideline?

"If only Trump had you as a lawyer" crosses both the personal attack and snark lines, especially with your other comment guiding interpretation.

I'm just a bystander who likes to hang out here, but FWIW here are the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[arolihas]

I see. I guess I should have just stated that no actual evidence has stood up in the court of law by Trump’s legal team that has the most incentive to show such damning evidence. What’s crazy to me is that this community is more welcoming to wild conspiracy and misinformation stated politely than a less than kind refutation.

[nitrogen]

I think it would be nice to have a consolidated resource to link when someone raises a specific allegation of fraud, that contains a list of the arguments, court cases, and counterarguments. I chose to go on a partial media blackout in 2020 so the only things I've seen about the issue are some mathematical rebuttals on YouTube, whatever I see here on HN, and whatever I hear from my conservative friends.

It's likely some people are acting in bad faith, but many more just haven't seen convincing enough counterevidence to counteract what they've heard from "the other side". If we flag their posts so it's not even visible to most users and impossible to reply to, then it's impossible to have that conversation and we are just proving their claims of censorship and a lack of evidence.

I think it would help to have a summary essay, not attached to any news outlet, that simply listed the publicized claims of fraud (like this claim that mail-in voting is fraudulent), who benefits and loses (democrats are more likely to mail in ballots especially in 2020, so discrediting mail-in voting favors republicans), what evidence exists, what counterarguments invalidate the allegations, and whether the alleged fraud was sizable enough to sway the election. Boring and emotionless, like a spreadsheet.

[arolihas]

These people don’t listen to facts. They argue that the election results should be in favor of trump and that it was stolen and fraudulent. At the same time they insist that all of the Republican wins are perfectly valid. There’s no logic or evidence behind their beliefs that is grounded in reality. You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into. Especially not with something as emotionally lifeless as a spreadsheet. That won’t change anyone’s mind who has been primed by their conspiracy bubbles and outrage machines