Hacker News Reader

Comment by aww_dang | Hacker News Reader

Perhaps a more pertinent question comes from the perspective of realpolitik.

Which is more damaging to US political institutions, having an illegitimate president or admitting that the election was stolen?

I'd wager an admission of election changing fraud would make it almost impossible to recover any trust in political institutions. What would be the next steps from admitting that the election was fraudulent?

Given the above, I'm not sure it matters. Of course that scenario is still possible, if evidence is produced. The institutional incentives align towards keeping the results as is. Proceeding from there, what can be done to restore trust?

*Disclaimer, please do not misread this as an assertion of evidence existing, not existing or the validity of it.

View on HN

> what can be done to restore trust?

given the foregoing, are you sure you want people to trust the government?

It would be nice if people could trust the outcome of the election. More specifically, it would be nice if establishment media and political figures didn't respond to this distrust with castigation.

Distrusting government would still make sense for me personally. It would be idyllic if people looked towards decentralization, localism and private solutions. Trust in their local institutions or community, while drastically reducing the purview of the federal government. That's just my personal preference. I'm not sure it is applicable in the widespread, pragmatic sense.

Some kind of political figure reaching across the aisle, recognizing the concerns of those who feel disenfranchised looks like the pragmatic solution that isn't happening. Instead I see actions and accusations that are predictably creating more division.

> It would be nice if people could trust the outcome of the election.

Well I don’t know, in 2017 a professor asked us if democracy was in crisis and I thought “its never been healthier”. For the first time I can remember, people were actually trying to hold the President accountable for something. Now it is true that most of that was driven by the fact that they didn’t like who the President happened to be at the time, so maybe we can get that to work in our favor again.

> More specifically, it would be nice if establishment media and political figures didn't respond to this distrust with castigation.

Well on the one hand I agree with that, but on the other hand this is the result of some complicated interactions (no matter how you view the facts on the ground). If their distrust is actually motivated and harmful then I’m sure its not an act for those establishment types to castigate it. On the other hand such activity is sure to increase distrust. So we’re stuck again.

> Distrusting government would still make sense for me personally. It would be idyllic if people looked towards decentralization, localism and private solutions. Trust in their local institutions or community, while drastically reducing the purview of the federal government. That's just my personal preference. I'm not sure it is applicable in the widespread, pragmatic sense.

I agree generally

> Some kind of political figure reaching across the aisle, recognizing the concerns of those who feel disenfranchised looks like the pragmatic solution that isn't happening. Instead I see actions and accusations that are predictably creating more division.

I agree

The plan was enacted over the weekend... Only you never saw it.

Biden, his cabinet, and tons of both Dem and Republican senators and other officials were arrested. Proof of their vast crimes was shown. They were court martialed and found guilty.

However, it was decided this was too much for the American people to accept. Overturning the election and showing the crimes of these politicians could lead to Civil War.

So an agreement was reached: Biden and other deep state elements wI'll be allowed to move freely and serve their terms. President Trump would "concede" and leave office. But this is all for appearances.

Behind the scenes, Donald J. Trump is still President. This plan, known as SHADOWPREZ, was seen as a last resort. But it worked.

Anything that happens in the next 4 years is actually President Trumps doing.

Was this just creative writing or are you saying that that line of thought is out there and some nutcases actually believe it?

I've seen it (i.e., first-hand) in private groups on Facebook.

It's a copypasta[1] that's been making the rounds on the internet. It's a tongue-in-cheek way of poking fun at Q supporters, not some real delusions the OP is having.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copypasta

Now Trump is the deep state.

That scenario has potential to be developed in to an interesting novel or movie.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com