Why is Trump telling MAGA he doesn't need them voting? What's it mean?

Politics and Social Issues
1

So what’s the deal? Does Trump believe something other than votes is going to guarantee his “election” this November.

Be afraid, be very afraid!
Be aware!
Forewarned is forearmed!

Jul 29, 2024 #MSNBC #Trump #2024election

Rachel Maddow rounds up instances in which Donald Trump not only assures his supporters that if he is elected they won’t have to vote in the future, but also that even for this 2024 election he does not need votes. Maddow posits that the reason Trump doesn’t care about votes is that he intends to win by manipulating the administration of the voting tabulation.

70 election deniers placed in positions of power with a plan to refuse to certify this coming election in key states.

Tim Scott Embraces Trump’s Election Denialism, Won’t Commit to Accept Results

Given multiple opportunities, the South Carolina senator refused to say whether he would accept a Trump loss in the presidential election

BY PETER WADE

MAY 5, 2024

‘Mass refusals to certify election’ expected from officials in 3 swing states: report

Edith Olmsted / July 29, 2024

… In a never-issued executive order from December 2020, Trump cited officials in Coffee County, Georgia, refusing to certify the results of the 2020 election as proof that voter fraud had likely occurred, and reason enough to seize voting machines. …

2

How bizarre.
State election officials declaring themselves election fraudsters.
If the State cannot vouch for the honesty of its own election officials, perhaps it is time to bring in the military to oversee election integrity.

A perfect example where invoking Martial Law is appropriate.

3

Of what? That a biionaire is going to act like a billionaire? Fear is exactly what hw wants to invoke. Either people will follow him because he says he can fix the problem, or they’ll run around parsing his ramblings and accomplish nothing.

He talks weird. We know this. If you accuse him of thinking something, he’ll deny it or call you wrong for not thinking like him. The only response is to do the right thing, to work locally or globally or wherever you are most effective and actually fix actual problems. That will grow the movement that will fight the billionaires. But you can’t take them on as if you are in a room with them having a reasonable conversation because they own all the rooms that they are in.

1 Like
4

Fear that our elections are going be trivialized,
like everything really important seems to be these days,

Just another day on the trip to our self destruction.

Oh, it is not about “fighting the billionaires”.
It’s not even about proposing solutions, we’ve done signed the contracts, now we are simply going to just keep paying out until Earth’s evolving reality slaps us back into the dark ages

Lausten, about the only thing an individual can do is to become aware, to see past one’s own intellectual illusions, to recognizing the physical reality that’s unfolding, not because I think any of these trajectories can be turned around - but to steel oneself. To make sense of it, to hang on to one’s own sanity and dignity and self-awareness while the world around us crumbles.

Cold satisfaction, still it sure beats the plaintive “who could have imagined such thing”

5

A criminal who will do anything to stay out of prison. Being president keeps him out of prison.

6

Says the guy who accuses me of being complacent every chance he gets. Just be aware? Just look at screens of information and know what’s happening as if you are preparing for your high school current events quiz? I know you don’t do that, so why do you say it?

What I said is don’t give in to fear. Don’t let anyone tell you that you are not afraid enough. Don’t bother with someone who says if you aren’t acting a certain way, then are misinformed. The challenge is to face reality without becoming numb to it. To keep hope, to do what you know should be done, no matter the odds of making an actual difference.

7

Can’t do that trapped within one’s mindscape.

And, I’m saying, that can’t be done without appreciating the difference between what is unfolding within your mind (that your body/brain creates), and what is unfolding within the material biological/geological reality of this Earth that created our biological body.

8

Hear why Republican mayor in battleground state is endorsing Kamala Harris.

Mesa, Arizona Mayor John Giles, a Republican, tells CNN’s Laura Coates why he supports Vice President Kamala Harris’ presidential bid over Republican nominee Donald Trump.

Jul 30, 2024 #CNN #News

And here’s another look at what a lot of Republicans think of The Donald and why they agree that Kamala Harris is the candidate to vote for.

The Lincoln Project

9

I think the average knows the difference

10

Seems to me current events argue differently.

The average person? The average voter’s main concerns are gas prices, jobs, taxes, paychecks, healthy economy.
The average non-voter seems to be cynical or apathetic about everything beyond their self-interest.

Where’s the clarity?

11

Yeah sorry. There’s a name for that, when you leave out words, it’s getting worse.

You can be concerned about your job and still know your mind is divided from the rest of the physical world, while also being a part in it.

Also capable of feeling the divide.

12

You are deluding yourself.
You seem incapable of recognizing the difference between looking at a postcard and actually inhabiting the scene.

The evidence in our collective failures is woven right into our increasingly self-destructive society.

But we’re drifting from the main theme of this thread - which is about MAGA elevating election deniers into positions of legal responsibly over the election counts.
Is that another nothing burger in your estimation?

The 2022 campaign presented the political press corps with an unprecedented challenge — how to cover candidates who deny the validity of elections. Repeating the unfounded claims that Joe Biden was not legitimately elected in 2020 is a political stance far different than, say, advocating for lower taxes or wanting to restrict abortion rights.

Election deniers challenge the very premise of democracy, while candidate debates over government spending and social issues represent the essence of what democracy is all about. As such, media coverage of election denial candidates should appropriately reflect just how antithetical their views are to the normal political process.

In the end, the 2022 elections proved unkind to election deniers as voters rejected most of the prominent proponents of these false charges. But for the mainstream media, the issues raised by candidates decrying a “stolen election” did not end on November 8. The validity of the 2020 presidential race will likely continue to be questioned in future election campaigns. Moreover, other analogous antidemocratic challenges may also emerge in 2024 and beyond. It is not hard to imagine the rise of 2024 candidates who echo Donald Trump in talking about suspending parts of the Constitution or even discussing the merits of a military coup. So it remains relevant to question what standards political reporters should employ in chronicling the campaigns of candidates who undermine American democracy itself.

Looking at the midterms in hindsight, …

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/06/26/certification-2024-election-results/

… The candidates who we’ve classified as deniers have expressly pushed claims of fraud or the idea of a stolen election. Dan Cox in Maryland and Doug Mastriano in Pennsylvania, for example, each organized buses to the Stop the Steal rally on Jan. 6 that preceded the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. Cox claimed to witness voter fraud. Mastriano held events with Rudy Giuliani to push fraud claims. Others have used works like “stole” (Alabama’s Gov. Kay Ivey), “corrupt” (Arizona’s Kari Lake), and “rigged” (Massachusetts’ Geoff Diehl). …

13

You hijacked your own thread at post #7. You fell back on your constant repetition of body/brain/unfolding/reality words. I have never even slightly suggested that we don’t fight hard against MAGA Republicans. What I’ve said is, they have rebranded themselves, rallied behind a openly dictatorial leader, and successfully blinded their opposition, us, by putting the focus on the insane ramblings of a few men. That takes away the energy we need to fight each individual fight that we’ve been fighting for 150 years. (I can list them if you’d like).

This began when you and I are were little, when evangelicals quietly re-grew their network (after being shoved aside by the Scopes Trial and) Billy Graham walked into the White House. Bush and Cheney figured out how to get those votes and began the process of manipulating the justice system, and all of them abused the truth with their books and “think tanks” that cranked out misinformation. Project 2025 is nothing more than notes taken on that movement. It has been out in the open the whole time.

Note also, the system of checks and balances have held so far. Trump’s coup attempt was so bad, people who were for it argue that it wasn’t a coup attempt. Cheney’s daughter was on the panel that exposed it all in Congress. Perpetrators are in jail, lost their law licenses, and their businesses have failed. Not all of them, I know. I know you have your list of things they are winning. But I think there is more splitting going on in the Republican Party than we see. Instead, we see the show, the one that keeps us distracted from the slow battle of doing what’s right.

14

Yipe, with a descriptive sentence like that, I’m shocked and mortified at how off base you are. Or do you still not get the part about your body/brain creating your thoughts and sense of consciousness?

You maybe get a sense of security for how our Democratic governmental systems of check and balances, with the press and an informed engaged electorate supervising the whole, has performed - I’m appalled at how much rot has been injected.
Our democracy and public discuss and general civil intercourse has been indescribably harmed.

Don’t worry folks, everything is alright, trust me, relax, we’re stress tested.

15

I get it. Most everyone gets it. We all learned it in elementary school. Even people who are indoctrinated into fundamentalism are told this. You can make up some story that because the world is how it is that proves I don’t get it, but your story is about as useful as one about a guy being nailed to a cross.

You have lost all sense of nuance. It’s either ‘false sense of security’ or ‘the end is near’. Neither of those are accurate. Those are extreme. You are extreme.

16

Tell it to Chalmers, et al.
It’s what all the modern science books tell us, but it still hasn’t seep in.
Show me some significant quotes that demonstrate otherwise.

But let’s get back to the theme of thread. (oh and being guilty of side tracking discussions, doesn’t me I’m adverse to getting said topics back on point.

Sure we’ve been told that since I was in high school.
It used to carry more truth with it than it does nowadays.
Have you seen the global news? Oy vey.

Using cartoon wording ignores the reality of various existentially important trajectories. that being absolutely unsustainable.

========================

As for the politics, that’s a dynamic tug of war, apathy is the enemy, awareness offers possibilities.

America depends upon an informed and engaged electorate. It’s nice seeing how Kamala has energized the whole political situation. More people than ever might be interested in learning about how serious it actually is. But what do I know? Here’s a bit of what’s being reported.

Aug 1, 2024 Democracy Watch with Marc Elias

Democracy Watch episode 161: Marc Elias discusses election officials who refuse to certify the election based on bogus fraud claims.

www.AmericanOversight.org - JUNE 14, 2024

NEWSLETTER: THE ANTI-DEMOCRATIC PUSH TO ALLOW OFFICIALS TO REFUSE TO CERTIFY ELECTIONS

The election denial movement is deploying a variety of tactics aimed at undermining our democracy in advance of this year’s election. One such tactic can be seen in the sprawling effort to allow election officials to refuse to certify results.

Last month, a Fulton County, Ga., election board member filed a lawsuit — backed by the Trump-aligned America First Policy Institute — that argues county election board members should be allowed to reject the certification of elections at their own discretion. …

American Oversight has been investigating the network of activists and groupspushing false theories of election fraud to foster mistrust in the democratic process. …

On the Records

A Far-Right Legal Group’s Ties to the Texas AG’s Office
America First Legal — a group run by Trump administration alumni Stephen Millerand Gene Hamilton — is providing legal assistance to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton for free, per a contract obtained by Law Dork. …

Other Stories We’re Following

ELECTION DENIAL AND THREATS TO DEMOCRACY

…

VOTING RIGHTS

…

IN THE STATES

…

NATIONAL NEWS

…

LGBTQ RIGHTS

…

ABORTION AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS

…

GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY AND PUBLIC RECORDS LAW

…

IMMIGRATION

…

TRUMP ACCOUNTABILITY

…

About American Oversight . org

American Oversight is a nonpartisan, nonprofit watchdog that advances truth, accountability, and democracy by enforcing the public’s right to government records.

Since our launch in March 2017, we have obtained and published tens of thousands of documents from federal, state, and local government agencies. Records uncovered by American Oversight have supported congressional inquiries, investigative journalism, and independent actions by partner organizations — and our work has been featured in hundreds of news stories around the country.

17

I have no idea what you are asking for. This is something that can’t be put into an easy to digest meme. Sapolsky does it over and over in his talks, it takes 5 to 20 minutes, but you’re going to email him and critique it. Pinker does it, but you strawman him by taking a few sentences in the intro to his TED talk and claiming that is his entire theme and pick at his data to say it doesn’t support the conclusion that you made up. You dismiss John Vervaeke out of hand because he references dead philosophers in his work.

Then you have the nerve to say I’m not engaging you.