Poll of the Day > So what happens if its proven that the election was rigged?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Does the election process start all over? Who becomes the interim president? Does everything the Trump admin did become void?
---

Its covered up and nothing happens

Given that we already had a pointless recount which showed that Hillary's votes were *overcounted* by machines (at a rate of 1 per district, due to some error), we pretty much know it wasn't rigged in Trump's favor nor is any serious person alleging that right now.

At this point, they can't feasibly recount anyway for any number of reasons.
---

It wasn't rigged. At worst people were swayed by foreign propaganda disturbingly easily which I guess might be worse because at least rigging is something that can be fixed/prevented.

Most of the accusations have been about Russia influencing the election, not rigging it. Those are two very different things.
---

I suppose it's the natural reaction for folk to scream "fix!" when they don't get the outcome they want.
---

Nothing will happen. even if there was incredible evidence and videos and signed confessions nothing will happen. (for either side if they did anything) there will be at most some fluff bs apologies and then move on as nothing happened in a month. people are stupid and will forget as soon as its out of the media. ive been watching the same old show and dance for decades.

The same thing that happened when we found out the primaries were rigged, nothing.
---

NightShift posted...

Nothing will happen. even if there was incredible evidence and videos and signed confessions nothing will happen. (for either side if they did anything) there will be at most some fluff bs apologies and then move on as nothing happened in a month. people are stupid and will forget as soon as its out of the media. ive been watching the same old show and dance for decades.

No you haven't. Such a thing would be unPresidented. This hasn't happened before, so it really isn't clear at all what would happen if it were proven that the election was rigged (not merely influenced) in Trump's favor.
---

Golden Road posted...

unPresidented

You mean "unprecedented".
---

EclairReturns posted...

You mean "unprecedented".

EclairReturns posted...

Golden Road posted...

unPresidented

You mean "unprecedented".

---

What if it was proven that it was rigged but Trump was unaware of a third party rigging it in his favor?
---

Duck-I-Says posted...

At worst people were swayed by foreign propaganda disturbingly easily which I guess might be worse

To be fair, in most elections the vast majority of voters are being swayed by domestic propaganda disturbingly easily.

Is it really that much worse if people are believing lies coming from another country as opposed to the lies they're being fed in their own home?

Most voters are incredibly ill-informed, and have no real interest or desire in educating themselves. Until that problem is addressed in some way, where the lies are coming from is almost immaterial.


---

EclairReturns posted...

Golden Road posted...

unPresidented

You mean "unprecedented".

Ruined a joke.
---

What if a baby was president? There would be no taxes, there would be no war. There would be no government and... things could get terrible. Actually probably it would be a better screenplay idea than a serious suggestion.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

To be fair, in most elections the vast majority of voters are being swayed by domestic propaganda disturbingly easily.

Is it really that much worse if people are believing lies coming from another country as opposed to the lies they're being fed in their own home?

Most voters are incredibly ill-informed, and have no real interest or desire in educating themselves. Until that problem is addressed in some way, where the lies are coming from is almost immaterial.

I'll take wants power for selfish reasons, but ultimately has some stake in the country vs would prefer to see the country completely ripped apart any day.

It wasn't rigged in Trump's favor. There is absolutely 0 evidence that Donald Trump ever colluded with Russia, especially since the media kept shitting on him for every last thing he has done, for more than 30 years. He couldn't even sneeze without the media reporting it.

There is however, substantial evidence that Uranium One sold Russia 20% of our Uranium deposits, and used the $100,000,000 they gained from that or so, and donated it to the Clinton Foundation (which is a scam charity).

http://tinyurl.com/y9obj3dx

I only used TinyURL because the link was too long

By the time it gets figured out it will already be in the history books.
---

"I don't have the evidence but I know for sure that the election wasn't rigged" - posters

wah_wah_wah posted...

"I don't have the evidence but I know for sure that the election wasn't rigged" - posters

It's not that we don't have evidence that it wasn't rigged, but we do have evidence that the narrative that Trump colluded with Russia to rig the election in his favor, is faked news, but instead, Hillary Clinton worked with Uranium One to sell Russia 20% of our Uranium deposits.

There would have been substantial evidence shown up long before Trump took office, especially during Obama's final months as a lame-duck President, that the election was fraudulent in his favor. But instead, everyone accuses Trump of rigging the election, with no evidence, instead hoping that it would turn up somewhere.

TheWorstPoster posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

"I don't have the evidence but I know for sure that the election wasn't rigged" - posters

It's not that we don't have evidence that it wasn't rigged, but we do have evidence that the narrative that Trump colluded with Russia to rig the election in his favor, is faked news, but instead, Hillary Clinton worked with Uranium One to sell Russia 20% of our Uranium deposits.

There would have been substantial evidence shown up long before Trump took office, especially during Obama's final months as a lame-duck President, that the election was fraudulent in his favor. But instead, everyone accuses Trump of rigging the election, with no evidence, instead hoping that it would turn up somewhere.

Everyone accuses Trump of that? Exaggeration much? Who is we, by the way? Also why is Hillary being a corrupt shithead somehow make Trump's corruption and general disdain of the public any better?

Duck-I-Says posted...

EclairReturns posted...

You mean "unprecedented".

I sometimes suspect he does that shit on purpose. A lot of his typos/misspellings seem like puns.

Ogurisama posted...

What if it was proven that it was rigged but Trump was unaware of a third party rigging it in his favor?

Couldn't happen because the counts are done with. However, if rigging was found at all during the recounts, the rigged votes would be removed (if they were added) or, if it was changing votes, they might be able to fix it. If they couldn't, it's *possible* they'd need to redo the thing for certain districts.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Duck-I-Says posted...

At worst people were swayed by foreign propaganda disturbingly easily which I guess might be worse

To be fair, in most elections the vast majority of voters are being swayed by domestic propaganda disturbingly easily.

Is it really that much worse if people are believing lies coming from another country as opposed to the lies they're being fed in their own home?

Most voters are incredibly ill-informed, and have no real interest or desire in educating themselves. Until that problem is addressed in some way, where the lies are coming from is almost immaterial.

Plus in every election, foreign powers try to influence US voters and the US consistently tries to influence foreign voters. In Russia's case, there's no way of knowing what they were actually trying to do because there wasn't much rhyme or reason to the ads they bought -- other than to incense the public -- and they pretty handed over anti-Trump info in that dossier. Honestly, the initial CIA conclusion -- that Russia was just fucking with us in retaliation for Hillary trying to undermine their vote -- might be the case.

wah_wah_wah posted...

"I don't have the evidence but I know for sure that the election wasn't rigged" - posters

We know that it wasn't rigged (by Russia, anyway) because the US government has tight controls over the system -- which is why they ridiculed the idea it could be rigged in Hillary's favor (even if she turned around and claimed it was rigged to favor Trump) -- and we subsequently ran a recount which found no evidence of rigging either. After a certain point of having a conspiracy theory which keeps getting disproved, you have to give up the theory or just be crazy.
---

Realistically there would be an impeachment I think.
---

https://medium.com/@lessig/equalvotes-us-where-we-are-where-were-going-b421ae6c2e09

actually someone deleted a election machines harddrive and then deleted the back up and they were amoung custodians in georgia to stop a trial

to say that any rigging doesn't happen is just asinine
we saw what the dnc could do to bernie
i'm sure russia rigs it's elections
---

Golden Road posted...

Most of the accusations have been about Russia influencing the election, not rigging it. Those are two very different things.

By "accusations" do you mean "facts"?

EclairReturns posted...

Golden Road posted...

unPresidented

You mean "unprecedented".

@EclairReturns

He even capitalized the P to get his joke across, you dumbass. You should be ashamed.

Zeus posted...

Given that we already had a pointless recount which showed that Hillary's votes were *overcounted* by machines (at a rate of 1 per district, due to some error), we pretty much know it wasn't rigged in Trump's favor nor is any serious person alleging that right now.

At this point, they can't feasibly recount anyway for any number of reasons.

...why the fuck would they do a recount if it's found that the count was illegitimate to begin with?
---

"Russian influence in the election" literally means Adidas-wearing gopniks in a basement swilling cheap vodka posted Pepe memes on social media. That was the extent of the Russian influence.

US media makes it sound like Putin ordered an elite military task force to hijack US databases and alter election results for Trump's gain.
---

RoboXgp89 posted...

https://medium.com/@lessig/equalvotes-us-where-we-are-where-were-going-b421ae6c2e09

Do you have a non-shady-as-fuck-alt-news-garbage-site to make your case?

RoboXgp89 posted...

we saw what the dnc could do to bernie

lol, just fucking lol. That's wrong for so many fucking reasons and, ironically enough, was Russian propaganda against the DNC.

JTekashiro posted...

Golden Road posted...

Most of the accusations have been about Russia influencing the election, not rigging it. Those are two very different things.

By "accusations" do you mean "facts"?

His use of "accusations" is factually correct.

SlashmanSG posted...

Zeus posted...

Given that we already had a pointless recount which showed that Hillary's votes were *overcounted* by machines (at a rate of 1 per district, due to some error), we pretty much know it wasn't rigged in Trump's favor nor is any serious person alleging that right now.

At this point, they can't feasibly recount anyway for any number of reasons.

...why the fuck would they do a recount if it's found that the count was illegitimate to begin with?

And how exactly would you find the count was illegitimate without the recount process, considering that the process includes checking the machines? There was literally nothing to suggest that the voting machines were compromised -- contrary to Trump and Hillary's claims -- so claiming that the count was in any way illegitimate goes out the window. I'm also not sure *how* you think Russians could have rigged those systems, because it would require them actually being in the country to physically influence the machines and in positions of government where they would have access to the machines.

The machines themselves are constantly guarded and inspected. It's pretty hard to rig them. It's easier to commit ballot fraud either via impersonation or mail-in ballots.

faramir77 posted...

"Russian influence in the election" literally means Adidas-wearing gopniks in a basement swilling cheap vodka posted Pepe memes on social media. That was the extent of the Russian influence.

That and the alleged DNC hack. Assuming that -- because the FBI never actually touched the machines and everything was handled by the DNC & a consulting group it hired -- the hack occurred at all
---

faramir77 posted...

"Russian influence in the election" literally means Adidas-wearing gopniks in a basement swilling cheap vodka posted Pepe memes on social media. That was the extent of the Russian influence.

US media makes it sound like Putin ordered an elite military task force to hijack US databases and alter election results for Trump's gain.

Putin didn't order anything. That's not how he operates, that would implicate him too deeply. There was a general operation in Russia in support of Trump over Hillary and that cannot be dismissed at this point. There was more than simply misinformation. That's already been reported. Actual attempts were made to hack voting machines.

I don't take the tack of most partisan Democrats, that Trump was supported by Russia because he was financially on the hook with Russia. Some of his aides probably were compromised in this way though. I think the Russian thinking on supporting Trump had more to do with how he was far less capable to provide world leadership than Hillary, which benefits Russia.

There's also how hysterical the media is about election interference only as a principle that it was OUR election (while sidestepping how the US government has done this brazenly to several governments for years, including Russia's government)... but yeah you probably don't care about that. That sort of hypocrisy is fine by you.

wah_wah_wah posted...

There was a general operation in Russia in support of Trump over Hillary and that cannot be dismissed at this point. There was more than simply misinformation.

Given everything we've learned via the ad campaigns -- as well as the fact they contributed to that anti-Trump dossier -- that narrative seems to have been shattered. They were SUPPORTING Hillary at times and contributing to the anti-Trump efforts. Their agenda, if anything, seems to solely been about sowing chaos and making our election look illegitimate.
---

Given how blatantly the election was stolen from Al Gore and nothing came of it, I think it's pretty safe to say that no action would be retroactively taken.

Not that the election was actually rigged in favor of Trump through Russian interference. It was rigged in favor of Trump through the electoral college system.

DistantMemory posted...

It was rigged in favor of Trump through the electoral college system.

If it were to be solely based on popular vote, all one needs to do is campaign in California, New York, Texas, and only the 10 most major cities outside of those states, to secure a victory.

Nothing else.

So that means that somebody who lives in a place like Idaho, has no say as to who would represent him on a Federal level, as opposed to someone living in Hollywood.

TheWorstPoster posted...

DistantMemory posted...

It was rigged in favor of Trump through the electoral college system.

If it were to be solely based on popular vote, all one needs to do is campaign in California, New York, Texas, and only the 10 most major cities outside of those states, to secure a victory.

Nothing else.

So that means that somebody who lives in a place like Idaho, has no say as to who would represent him on a Federal level, as opposed to someone living in Hollywood.

The electoral college doesn't remedy that problem at all. I don't remember Trump or Clinton making several weekend campaign visits to Montana in that election. What the electoral college does is make elections decided by swing states - many of them being rather big (Ohio and Florida in particular). In short what you're saying the electoral college does never actually has happened in any election ever. The smaller states are still completely ignored.

I imagine that many members of congress will condemn the president and then pretend they can't hear questions when reporters ask them about impeachment proceedings
---

DistantMemory posted...

Given how blatantly the election was stolen from Al Gore and nothing came of it, I think it's pretty safe to say that no action would be retroactively taken.

#Bullshit

DistantMemory posted...

Not that the election was actually rigged in favor of Trump through Russian interference. It was rigged in favor of Trump through the electoral college system.

The electoral system isn't "rigging," it's literally how things have always been decided. The national popular vote is no more valid than an internet straw poll.
---

People still say it wasn't and say it's a liberal agenda or some other bs
---

Zeus posted...

#Bulls***

Nobody possessing a shred of intellectual honesty would look at that situation and think it wasn't stolen from him. This is why nobody buys your left-leaning centrist narrative.

Zeus posted...

The electoral system isn't "rigging," it's literally how things have always been decided.

Something being the way it's always been done is not a defense for said thing. That has nothing to do with its validity. Fact is that what it amounts to is a way in which the candidate less people want for President can still win despite the will of the people. It's undemocratic and needs to go.

Zeus posted...

The national popular vote is no more valid than an internet straw poll.

Which is the problem.

Zeus? Left leaning? There's no way he supports the left
---

What I really find baffling in arguments defending the electoral college is how they often present it as some sort of fair system that defends the little guy against the mob. Because there is no reality at all to that argument. There is only rhetoric. The electoral college has been in practice since a little after the founding. We have dozens of elections to look at the data to verify this claim. And again, no evidence defends smaller states at all against the bigger states. Or the rural people against the city slickers. It only arbitrarily gives certain people more of a vote than others, which has arbitrary effects on our entire system of government, some of which diminish its representive quality and when done on a winner-take-all basis, removes citizens votes entirely. If you're among the 39% loyal reds in California that voted for Trump... sorry you get absolutely nothing for that. ALL the electors were chosen for Clinton. That's not representative.

I'm not really on the side of "the electoral college needs to go"... but at the very least the methods used to select electors need to be constitutional. And they aren't. At all. Winner-take-all clearly violates equal protection.

DistantMemory posted...

Zeus posted...

#Bulls***

Nobody possessing a shred of intellectual honesty would look at that situation and think it wasn't stolen from him. This is why nobody buys your left-leaning centrist narrative.

No, the fact I don't buy into leftwing propaganda is why I'm a left-leaning centrist instead of a leftist. The fact that you open wide and swallow a load of nonsense is why you're so easily duped by that silliness.

DistantMemory posted...

Zeus posted...

The electoral system isn't "rigging," it's literally how things have always been decided.

Something being the way it's always been done is not a defense for said thing. That has nothing to do with its validity. Fact is that what it amounts to is a way in which the candidate less people want for President can still win despite the will of the people. It's undemocratic and needs to go.

Given that it's how the fucking system works and you're proposing abandoning it in favor of a system that generates outcomes you want, it's completely 100% valid and therefore doesn't need defending. Fact is we live in a REPUBLIC so the will of the people is collectively determined by state-level outcomes which, by the way, is a far fairer way to do it.

DistantMemory posted...

Zeus posted...

The national popular vote is no more valid than an internet straw poll.

Which is the problem.

No, the problem is kids chasing the flavor of the moment and not because they feel that it's right, but because they recognize it advantages their preferences.
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

What I really find baffling in arguments defending the electoral college is how they often present it as some sort of fair system that defends the little guy against the mob. Because there is no reality at all to that argument. There is only rhetoric. The electoral college has been in practice since a little after the founding. We have dozens of elections to look at the data to verify this claim. And again, no evidence defends smaller states at all against the bigger states. Or the rural people against the city slickers. It only arbitrarily gives certain people more of a vote than others, which has arbitrary effects on our entire system of government, some of which diminish its representive quality and when done on a winner-take-all basis, removes citizens votes entirely. If you're among the 39% loyal reds in California that voted for Trump... sorry you get absolutely nothing for that. ALL the electors were chosen for Clinton. That's not representative.

And it is a fairer system, considering that decisions are made at the state level. There's never been any basis to the argument against it because states with larger populations STILL have a larger representation, even if it's not as nation-breaking as they want it to be.

wah_wah_wah posted...

I'm not really on the side of "the electoral college needs to go"... but at the very least the methods used to select electors need to be constitutional. And they aren't. At all. Winner-take-all clearly violates equal protection.

lolwut? Keep on shitposting in the free world. Next you're going to be complaining that the winner-takes-all nature of the presidency violates equal protection, based on some nonsense idea that there should be co-presidents.
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

What I really find baffling in arguments defending the electoral college is how they often present it as some sort of fair system that defends the little guy against the mob. Because there is no reality at all to that argument. There is only rhetoric. The electoral college has been in practice since a little after the founding. We have dozens of elections to look at the data to verify this claim. And again, no evidence defends smaller states at all against the bigger states. Or the rural people against the city slickers. It only arbitrarily gives certain people more of a vote than others, which has arbitrary effects on our entire system of government, some of which diminish its representive quality and when done on a winner-take-all basis, removes citizens votes entirely. If you're among the 39% loyal reds in California that voted for Trump... sorry you get absolutely nothing for that. ALL the electors were chosen for Clinton. That's not representative.

I'm not really on the side of "the electoral college needs to go"... but at the very least the methods used to select electors need to be constitutional. And they aren't. At all. Winner-take-all clearly violates equal protection.

It's because the electoral college generally favors land area over population.

Look at the general bull shit republicans give for liking it, "It keeps new york and california from deciding everything!" aside from how much nonsense that is they are basically saying "it diminishes the vote of these two states I don't like".

What is really funny and sad is when they try to claim the system was set up for said purpose by the founding fathers, instead of a response to when states used to have some people count as 3/5 of a person and their general dislike of "non-landing owning people".

BlackScythe0 posted...

What is really funny and sad is when they try to claim the system was set up for said purpose by the founding fathers, instead of a response to when states used to have some people count as 3/5 of a person and their general dislike of "non-landing owning people".

The problem with that completely fallacious claim is that electors decided the presidency from the very beginning. It wasn't "in response to" anything.
---

The Founding Fathers also didn't trust us with any power.
---

the electoral college was created to prevent billy the potatoe fucker from becoming president, it also had a representive come from each district to report who had won
it has nothing to do with equality that's like keeping rotary phones around because they make people more social lol
---

The only way the electoral collage would have any merit would be to give NYC (not state- the rest of the state would have .1 vote) 500 electoral votes.

If not- drop the whole thing.
---

DistantMemory posted...

Zeus posted...

The electoral system isn't "rigging," it's literally how things have always been decided.

Something being the way it's always been done is not a defense for said thing. That has nothing to do with its validity. Fact is that what it amounts to is a way in which the candidate less people want for President can still win despite the will of the people. It's undemocratic and needs to go.

What would be undemocratic is having 3 or 4 states decide the president for the rest of the country.
---