Why do you think Americans "voted in massive numbers" to "Dump trump", but then 4 years later changed their mind?

[viking8x6]

37 minutes ago, SomewhereonNeptune said:

Voter intimidation/voter purging. That's a subject near and dear to me since I and others went to court in NY over electoral fraud issues in a local election. Fraud happens. I could explain how states like NY do more to allow it while Florida clamps down hard on it, but I might as well put that in a blog under several parts. I know that local election commissions tend to get voters on the books and not do much to get them off, and that in most cases that generally benefits Democrats more than Republicans. Voter intimidation? That happened. In Philadelphia, where it was caught on video and well documented. If you really examined it, the incidence can be far likelier in 'blue' cities than in 'red' districts. Both Fulton County, Georgia and Maricopa County, Arizona had irregularities that came to light post-election.

This assertion, posted without corroborating evidence, is really close to violating the rule against posting conspiracy theories. I personally believe there is good reason (based on history) to doubt that on a national basis these things redound to the net benefit of the left wing.

[nanana]

6 hours ago, TaKinGDeePanal said:

pro-Trump MSM/Russian social media disinformation;...

Gaza (which we Kremlinologists know to be the Second Front of Ukraine);...

the majority of the US voting public deciding that a black female was inferior to a white male;...

voter intimidation, e.g., arson attacks on ballot boxes and bomb threats being called in to polling places; and

Hi @TaKinGDeePanal , 

I excerpted several things that seem like malinformation, misinformation, and disinformation, along with appreciation for the heads up on the bomb threats, which I  either never knew or totally forgot.  While I  do not wish that our dear censors would subject your unsupported assertions to the same banning that they regularly accept non-leftist unsupported assertions, it would be really nice to see some sources for what you assert here.   BTW, I    personally have no problem telling the difference between (or at least have a high tolerance for) an asserted interpretation, hyperbole, a hypothesis, an opinion, a "fact" (be it true or false), and a "statistic" (be it logically or illogically cited).  I don't have a problem with "gut" either.  (Dear censors, consider giving us all some grace to mix our interpretations and assertions in with your love of "facts" of whatever source you think credible.)

here are some sources for my assertions: 

Relates to "pro-Trump MSM/Russian social media disinformation"

- Russiagate is a hoax: [think before following links] https://www.racket.news/p/why-is-russiagates-origin-story-redacted.  

- The Durham Report provides pretty conclusive evidence that FBI/DOJ ignored leads about the "Clinton Plan intelligence" to falsely associate Donald Trump with Russia and acted only on the uncorroborated "Steele Dossier" which hid the Clinton connection: [think before following links] https://www.justice.gov/archives/media/1381211/dl (look at p.78).  

- although I'm unable to find a citation for the debunking of the Russia social media election interference, this wikipedia article shows the extent of US interference in foreign elections (over 60 citations of US interference versus 15 for Russia.  Even if you add the Soviet Union [an extra 28] despite the fact that it was a different government, it strains credibility that bots on FaceTime spouting ideologies that didn't resonate with a native population would turn an election ([think before following links] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_electoral_interventions).  

Relates to "Gaza (which we Kremlinologists know to be the Second Front of Ukraine)"

- can you at least do more than appeal to your Kremlinologist priesthood authority and explain? It's an interesting, provocative statement that would be fun to hear more on.  It's not clear whether you are saying that Russia and Israel are on the same side, or that Ukraine and Israel are on the same side.  

Relates to "the majority of the US voting public deciding that a black female was inferior to a white male"

- I'm interpreting this as your privilege (which I    fully support) to assert that racism and anti-feminism were the main causes of Kamala's defeat.  If you have any polling data or numbers on how much these factors contributed, it would be more to chew on than an identitarian assertion.

Relates to "voter intimidation, e.g., arson attacks on ballot boxes and bomb threats being called in to polling places"

- crazy, I   don't remember this at all @TaKinGDeePanal, here are some sources on the Bomb Threats: [think before following links] https://apnews.com/article/vote-ballot-drop-box-democracy-fire-f66c52f774955106fb9e7c8172825cff and [think before following links] https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/fbi-statement-on-bomb-threats-to-polling-locations, none of which appeared to be credible so far.  Of course, the first news source claims to debunk 2000 Mules, when in fact they are casting a very reasonable doubt on 2000 Mules, so it makes me distrust the source's ability to be fully logical.  Given the use of Russian e-mails, combined with the fact that none were credible, I  hypothesize that this was a false flag smear, but I  am not stating a fact, merely a hypothesis.  

[NYBBGUY58]

I don't think there's a single explanation. Part of it is a particular political moment with moves away from internationalism.  It's like asking why did the citizens of the UK vote resoundingly to "Brexit" from the EU? Neither country will benefit economical from isolationist policies, but they make for great sound bytes. Some of it, I believe, is lingering fury over the 2006/2007 subprime mortgage debacle. Entire life savings evaporated, and yet some of the primary beneficiaries (e.g., Jamie Dimon) were never called to account. On top of it, the U.S. chose to use taxpayer money to bail out several industries. In many places, people embrace simplistic solutions because the institutions do not serve their interests.  After either the 2008 or 2012 election in the US, an article ran in Vanity Fair(?) titled Government of the One Percent by the One Percent. The economic interests of the vast majority of citizens in the U.S. are not shared by their representatives, and it's not easy to get representatives who will represent us since incumbency is tantamount to permanent tenure, and there's much too much money infused by corporations. The Citizens United Supreme court decision essentially declared corporations and unions to have the free speech rights of individuals. That has left us with a bunch of self-interested "individuals" with outsized funds to funnel into getting candidates elected. Unions have been on the run since the Regan presidency of the 80s, so they don't have as much clout.

All of this has translated into unfocused fury and a lack of real political alternatives. I personally think that too many are looking for the knight in shining armor (aka, presidential candidates) to rescue us, which doesn't really work. To create even the possibility of change, the broader mass of citizens of the US are going to have to figure out how to talk one another, and not get so organized the bipartisan organization of political life. Otherwise, our political dialogue will continue to be deadlocked.

[SomewhereonNeptune]

11 hours ago, viking8x6 said:

This assertion, posted without corroborating evidence, is really close to violating the rule against posting conspiracy theories. I personally believe there is good reason (based on history) to doubt that on a national basis these things redound to the net benefit of the left wing.

So I'm happy here to stand corrected after revisiting this issue. One of the few videos to truly debunk it was from CNN (given their ratings, no wonder it went unnoticed):
 

For Philadelphia, you can say this was disputable. However, you could also say that the mere presence of a man with a billy club standing around outside a polling place (which he had no business at) can appear menacing to some. So @viking8x6 your point is well taken.  But...

...and you knew there'd be a "but", that doesn't mean that voting fraud doesn't occur. 

This is from a mayoral race in Connecticut. The laws are very clear that you cannot harvest ballots and take them en masse to a drop-box. And there are other ways in which the system can and has been subverted.

The Village of Kiryas Joel in New York was permitted to police its own election process, and did so through elections in the wider Town of Monroe. After the polls closed, poll watchers observed people entering the voting precinct carrying a large ballot bag, which was never explained to anyone when questioned. Further, during the 2013 election, the County Board of Elections provided the Village 102% of the ballots required for every registered voter. In precincts outside the Village? They got 60%. The Board of Elections took the blame and legal challenges made to have outsiders observe elections within the Village. (See "Convers, et al v. Orange County Board of Elections, et al"). 

Hope that's enough for y'all to understand that not every conservative point is a conspiracy theory and that issues do occur. If you want to explore Maricopa County, AZ, we can fork off to another thread. 🙂 

"really close to violating the rule against conspiracy theories". But no cigar. With all due respect, I wish that the non-conservative posters/commenters were treated just as equally. Sadly, I think that's an area ripe for improvement. TakingDeePanel raised a ton of those, so where's the admonition on those counts?

"posted without corroborating evidence". Again, all due respect, but I don''t see that request made on the counter-arguments. Have I missed that?

There are a lot of back-and-forth sniping comments on this thread already. I'd hope you'd be more concerned with the civility of a discussion than rating responses to other posts. That could have been done easily with TakingDeePanel's conspiracy point on Gaza and others, to which I chose to not comment because there was no substantiation to it. So I'd constructively argue we could do a much better job on neutrality if we're fine tooth combing points and perform it just as equally regardless of POV. I've substantiated my points and admitted where I'm mistaken (don't see that too often around here, do we gang?), but I just don't see that requirement applied universally.

Now I'll take my leave. Thought there was a glimmer of hope, but...I can admit when I'm wrong and clearly I misjudged that one.

Peace out gang.

[rawfuckingonly]

On 5/30/2025 at 4:36 AM, TaKinGDeePanal said:

For starters, the "Never Again Trumpers" all seem to have disappeared. Add to that the following: 

Biden deciding to seek re-election despite promising to be a one-term POTUS;

Harris promising to do everything the same as Biden (even including perpetuating the assistance of genocide - refer below);

Trump's bolted-on 46-48% of the active voting population;

pro-Trump MSM/Russian social media disinformation;

the refusal to attempt to grow the Democratic voterbase;

Gaza (which we Kremlinologists know to be the Second Front of Ukraine);

a perceived economic health downward trend/COL issues;

the majority of the US voting public deciding that a black female was inferior to a white male;

voter intimidation, e.g., arson attacks on ballot boxes and bomb threats being called in to polling places; and

voter purges

and you start to get an idea of what happened. 

-Another passage from the book of "Shit that Never Happened" -Written by Leftists

 

[AlwaysOpen]

To the original question regarding people voting for tRump again after his 1st run through the White House. History is a great place for learning, and can predict future behavior.

Travel back to Germany in the early 1930's, and how a guy named Adolph, who had already tried politics and got the boot, came back espousing hatred for a group of people , blaming them for every issue the general population was experiencing. He demonized a segment of the population, and the rest of the population either stood silent , perhaps out of fear of his retribution, or eagerly jumped in behind him.  Back then, it was the Jewish, the intellectuals , gays, gypsies. They were the problem, they were all thieves and less than humans. Fast forward to today, and the same demonization  of people of brown skin coming into this country labels all of them as drug dealers and murderers.  In the 1930's that guy Adolph promised a new Germania, of pure genetic Germans, wealth and power. And he had his brown shirts and SS to intimidate, coerce, and violate human rights and dignity. Todays version, we have ICE  agents who seize not the " worst of the worst" but the people who fled here and were trying to make a living. But the SS, err, ICE agents, were not enough, so under direct pressure, now damned near every state police, county sheriff, or local police department has become modern day brown shirts violating rights and the rule of law in order to appease a leader who demands total subservience and punishes anyone or any organization that does not do as he says- even when it is illegal. 

This dude Adolph didn't like people reading newspapers or books, so he burned the books and shut down the presses, allowing only his own brand of journalism to be printed. Senor TACO has been doing the same thing for ten years or more, casting doubt about media being fake, suing networks for hundreds of millions and threatening their license to operate, while at the same time embracing alleged truth social media platforms run by his order, or television media who willingly broadcast what he wants, even as behind the camera they acknowledge it is a crock of shit. 

We should all know what Hitler attempted, seizing country after country in the war for Germany, and stripping the assets of those countries to support himself and his empire. In todays version, we have someone who greedily takes ownership of bodies of water as his own, intimidates neighboring countries with threats of take overs, and even challenges distant countries to surrender their provinces to him. And all the whole, he attempts to cause worldwide instability and financial destruction with unprecedented threats to their industry and  commerce. 

And just as the Reichstag stood by and let things go absolutely out of control, of THEIR control, the US Congress and Senate members, who should be  railing against the unchecked craziness, instead are sucking up to the dictator wanna be, hoping to save  themselves from any personal attacks from the White House, while letting the balance of power fall away. I hope we never move to the next step Adolph took, the " ultimate solution", but if history is any sort of prediction of what may come next....