Summary

Donald Trump and his team are attacking media outlets like Politico and The New York Times for reporting that his 2024 election victory over Kamala Harris was narrow, not a “landslide.”

Trump won by 1.6 points and failed to secure a majority of the popular vote, a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton’s over him in 2016.

Despite these facts, Trump and his allies continue to tout his win as “historic” and “dominant,” aiming to bolster his political mandate amid criticisms that his victory was less decisive than claimed.

  • nifty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I kinda knew the popular vote thing would correct itself, I think the reason it’s this close at all is because most people don’t pay attention to politics as much as they should

  • xenomor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    66
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Remember that his first official act as president in his first term was to send Sean Spicer out, literally on day one, to scold the press corp for seeing the paltry crowd at his inauguration. This guy is always, always just small dick energy in an ill-fitting suit.

    • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Wow, that makes more sense in politics than it does in quantum mechanics

      Maybe we can model the quantum world on Politics.

      every time a politician has to make a statement he both agrees and disagrees until he knows who the audience.

  • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I mean if you take into account how stupid and incompetent he was in his last term and that he now he seems to be losing his faculties it was quite a landslide. Getting 10% should have been a miracle.

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 hours ago

      This is the only effective way to slow him down imo. Make fun of him for having small crowds at his rallies then sue him for libel when he says his were bigger. It doesn’t matter if it goes anywhere in court, you just need to force the conversation to keep his attention.

      • BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        21 minutes ago

        There was throwing out and refuse to count mail in ballots with out dates stamped in Pennsylvania. They did have fire bombing of ballot drop off boxes. There was phone calls from Russia. There was a media platform manipulating the news to be right wing.

        While I don’t think it wouldn’t have changed anything Kamala did lose by just over 250k votes in 4 states.

      • evatronic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I’m not one for conspiracy theories, and we don’t have any evidence to back up any sort of claims of rigging or election fraud. In fact, the various lawsuits Trump initiated in the last cycle and audits and recounts and so on provided a pretty damning pile of evidence for “not rigged”.

        Republicans aren’t rigging elections themselves. There’s no tomfoolery going on with voting machines, or people voting twice, or similar. They’re “rigging” it with legal means – disenfranchising voters, suppressing turnout, financing third party candidates to peel votes away from the other side, gerrymandering districts, and using massive propaganda systems to influence who decides to vote and what they choose when they do vote.

        All said, though, we can always make the system more robust, and increase both voters’ confidence in the system and allay any fears of actual rigging. But election reforms are often a “Democrat” issue, so almost any Republican will oppose meaningful reforms that don’t do one of the things above to suppress voters.

  • Hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    There’s even rumors that votes in the swing states were fraudulent as well. A disproportionate number of “bullet ballots” in swing states alone may indicate foul going-ons. The only way to tell would be a recount, however.

    Edit: Seems the info is dubious, at best. Partially straight up wrong. Oh well. A few hours of hope was nice.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Write your senators and representative and ask them to enforce section 3 of the 14th amendment and prevent an insurrectionist from holding office.

    • BedSharkPal
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      74
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      14 hours ago

      This has been shut down pretty well at this point.

      • Trev625@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        I read that earlier and I’m confused why it seems to matter if the vote is above the threshold for the state to flip or not to do a recount.

        Take Nevada: " As for Nevada, Spoonamore contended in his letter, “NV - 43K+ 5.5%+ of Trump’s total vote. Enough to exceed recount threshold.” The Nevada government website (archived) reported that — out of 1,487,887 total ballots cast — 1,484,840 ballots contained votes for presidential candidates and 1,464,728 contained votes for U.S. Senate candidates. The mximum number of “bullet votes” is 23,159. Trump received 46,008 more votes in Nevada than Harris. "

        Snopes seems to be saying that it doesn’t matter if Trump cheated and sneaked in 23k bullet votes because Kamala would have lost anyway without them. In my view, if ANY cheating occured then that’s like really bad right? Even if it didn’t flip the election?

        23k is a little more than half of 43k so the percentage would drop from 5.5% down to 2.8% which is still wayyy over the usual 0.05% bullet ballots which seems very odd and makes it recount worthy. (Note: The 0.05% bullet ballots figure comes from the original article which I haven’t fact checked since idk how so if that’s wrong please correct it “In comparison, bullet ballots for Trump in Oregon, Utah and Idaho—the three states which border Arizona and Nevada, with equally fervent Trump voters—count for less than 0.05% in each state.”)

        • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Even ignoring the math, the assertion that a statistically unlikely amount of bullet ballots means there has been fraud is kinda out there. Historically, bullet ballots are fairly common with populist candidates.

          • asteriskeverything@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 hours ago

            It does seem to me like a valid reason for a recount though and I believe this shit is being rugswept cuz we don’t wanna look like conspiracy theorists

        • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          I think since the total amount of bullet votes isn’t as massive as previously thought, it may only be somewhat outside of the norm, making the possible fraud less likely.

          I can see where it may be best to be tactical with a demand for recount if it won’t change the outcome, as then it could make it harder to have a recount in the next election to the point where it does change the outcome. That’s just my 2 cents tho.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Oh, thanks for that link. They did go really deep into the numbers with this one. I knew the whole Starlink part of the letter made no sense given how the internet works, but I still had questions about the number of bullet ballots, which Snopes addresses as well state by state.

    • nexusband@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      13 hours ago

      I think that’s all BS. However, what is not BS is that ballots have just “vanished”, due to being challenged by the Vigilante stuff. According to Greg Pallast, investigative journalist with the BBC, there have been over 800k provisional ballots that have not been counted because they have been thrown out. He even has the exact names of people, who’s ballots have been thrown out.

      If it wasn’t so dire, I’d find it extremely fascinating…

      https://youtu.be/X3hXeEiFcJM?si=-lJLqmIDZM4PewcT

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Problematic for a couple of reasons:

      1. You can’t just insert fake ballots, that would cause the vote count to be incorrect when compared to registered voters.

      2. A bullet ballot would support Trump, but have no impact on other races… races which we know Republicans won.

      Looking at Pennsylvania as an example:

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election_in_Pennsylvania

      Trump - 3,542,505
      Harris - 3,421,088
      Stein - 34,508
      Oliver - 33,299
      Total - 7,031,400
      Trump won by 121,417

      Now compare that to the Senate election:

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_election_in_Pennsylvania

      McCormick - 3,395,785
      Casey - 3,378,356
      Libertarian - 89,475
      Green - 66,185
      Constitution - 23,586
      Total - 6,953,384

      So 78,016 more people voted in the Presidential race than the Senate race, which is not enough to have given Trump the win if they were all bullet ballots.

      • nexusband@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        You don’t have to fake ballots. You can just throw absentee ballots out, after them being challenged…which happens since 2000 (it’s apparently one of the reasons Bush won), this time however there have been over 800k ballots that have been thrown out…in swing states alone.

        Considering the margins are so slim, a few 100k challenged voters here and there…and you have “We don’t need your votes, we have enough” https://youtu.be/X3hXeEiFcJM?si=-lJLqmIDZM4PewcT

        • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          That isn’t the claim though. The claim is enough “bullet ballots” (Trump only ballots) had been inserted to flip the election.

          Elections don’t work that way. I was telling people the same thing in 2016 and 2020.

          When people cast a vote, it’s tied to a registration. If you insert a bunch of votes, you end up with more ballots than voters.

          • adarza
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            counting machines could be compromised and doing an office space thing in targeted areas, flipping one democrat vote for every 10 counted. no one would question it. only a hand count would verify, and those aren’t usually done anymore.

            • Captainvaqina@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              10 hours ago

              THIS.

              They had direct access to our voting machines during their bullshit “inquiries”.

              The voting machines that ARE KNOWN to have direct access vulnerabilities.

  • DogPeePoo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Facts don’t care about his feelings.

    The gaslighting of his campaign knows no bounds.

  • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Yeah, well, this dickbird is already in and our chances of ever being able to legitimately get rid of him are, alas, extremely remote.

    So this is only a problem in his own petty little smooth brain. And yet.

  • nexusband@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Ballots have just “vanished”, due to being challenged by the Vigilante stuff. According to Greg Pallast, investigative journalist with the BBC, there have been over 800k provisional ballots that have not been counted because they have been thrown out. He even has the exact names of people, who’s ballots have been thrown out.

    If it wasn’t so dire, I’d find it extremely fascinating…

    https://youtu.be/X3hXeEiFcJM?si=-lJLqmIDZM4PewcT

  • Lung@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    Honestly hilarious level of QQ. The election wasn’t rigged. He won by almost 100 electoral college votes. He had the most popular votes, by 2.5 million people, roughly 50%. Republicans swept House, Senate, and Governors

    Elections in the USA are always pretty close, that’s how it works. But this victory is a complete and total one with no real room for doubt

    You may not like it, but those are the facts. Don’t mimic the sad boy GOP crying “election fraud” — the people voted. Yes, that means there are people in this country that disagree with you and don’t trust the direction of the Democrats. You might call them brainwashed, bigoted, transphobic, or religious extremists, but they get to voice their desires anyway. Society is a push and pull between different value systems, and imagining half the country is “evil” will only cause more harm

    Nothing is going to stop the transition. Buckle up, and try harder next time. Maybe the Dems will actually let a primary happen rather than choosing your leader for you

    • pivot_root@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      That “almost 100 electoral college votes” was conditional on as little as 200k total votes across three states contributing 44 EC votes, in all of which had at most a 2% lead. Anyone who actually thinks he won by a significant margin is an idiot.

      Wisconsin (10): +30k / 0.9%
      Pennsylvania (19): +81k / 1.7%
      Michigan (15): +80k / 1.4%

      Now regarding election fraud–not that the end result would change given how much more significant his leads in other states were, but playing devil’s advocate, getting 90k Harris votes thrown out in any one of those states could actually have made a difference for the state in question.

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Yeah I think you’re pretty fucking far off in claiming that pointing out a couple of facts about the outcome being closer than he says = raging about ElEcTiOn FrAUd