I would have sincere and heartfelt suspicions of those who continued to support that party while this stuff is going on. It's beyond party politics at that point.
For example, Hillary Clinton compared the 2000 Florida election recount to rigged elections in Nigeria. [1]
The Democrats continue to believe 2000 was rigged.
How about something more recent? Oh yeah, Hillary Clinton claims the 2016 election was "not on the level". Going much further, she calls the result "illegitimate", citing hacking (never proven) and voter suppression (no evidence). [2] [3] As recently as 4 years ago the Democrats were doing the exact same thing the Republicans are doing now.
[1] https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=8314204&page=1
[2] https://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton-maintains-2016-electi...
[3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trum...
[0] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-the-republican-push...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression_in_the_Unite...
You should have lawsuits won by DNC lawyers proving the illegitimacy of the election, right?
Where's the proof? Extraordinary claims (like denying the results of elections) require extraordinary evidence, of which you haven't provided.
Democrats' claims are on the same level as Republicans' 2020 conspiracy theories. It's even worse because they claim moral superiority on the issue of election rigging claims, when they did it 4 years earlier on a huge scale.
Point is, don't think that only one side has genuine concerns about the other trying to "undermine democracy". The whole thing is broken.
You don't have to commit to the other side, nobody says you have to love the democrats and all they stand for, I surely don't. But you can't look at the actions of the republican party over the last year and see them as anything other than anti-democratic and dangerous?
There was a coordinated campaign amongst ALL left-leaning media organizations, including social media like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc, to suppress a materially important story about the Biden family influence with Ukrainian and Chinese counter-parties just a few weeks ahead of the election.
The story, broke by the NY Post, was factually correct, but deemed "misinformation" on dubious grounds by all major media apparatuses, because it did not support their chosen candidate. There was no other reason.
There is NOTHING MORE ANTI-DEMOCRATIC than a Press that lies to the very people tasked with deciding elections. And that press overwhelmingly leans in a specific direction.
To claim that the Right is uniquely anti-democratic is both insane and factually incorrect. Hanlon's Razor rarely applies on HN (a bastion of competent, high-IQ posters), so it's fair to say that you are lying out of malice, not some sort of innocent misunderstanding of reality. Your bad-faith arguments are ridiculous and not grounded in any semblance of reality.
> The story, broke by the NY Post, was factually correct,
I wouldn't consider the NY Post to be a reliable news source[1].
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biden-Ukraine_conspiracy_theor...
From the Wikipedia article posted: "Fellow press outlets The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal stated that they could not verify the data provided by the New York Post independently" and "PolitiFact wrote in June 2021: "Over time, there has been less doubt that the laptop did in fact belong to Hunter Biden""
Contrast this with three years of mainstream media laundering absurd, and equally unsubstantiated stories of collusion predicated on the Steele Dossier.
My point has precisely zero to do with the validity of either story, but to do with the obvious full-court press by your side to smear the opposition and deny dissemination of reporting predicated on equally (in)valid source materials to point out that one side is not uniquely corrupt in the attempt to undermine democracy.
Everybody lies. And the OP's attempt to paint one side as some manner of angelic bastion of virtuousness is patently insane, disingenuous. and absurd. Human nature is what it is, and everyone involved here is evil. There are no angels. There are no good guys, but one side definitely has control of the microphone.
I might not agree with your conclusion but I appreciate the effort to explain the point your making.
Your attempt to paint my comments that way is more absurd, as I did no such thing.
> everyone involved here is evil
Maybe so, but one side literally just tried to overturn an election they lost to hang on to power. They're playing a different game.
Yeah, there is, there's a president trying to strong arm his way around a lost election.
> To claim that the Right is uniquely...
I'm not claiming anything about "the right", I'm talking about the republican party. To my eyes both parties in the US are "The Right". The democrats are generally conservative, business friendly, right-leaning moderates from what I can see.
And it's not a lie that Donald Trump refused to concede, that Donald Trump and his supporters attempted to get officials in other states to just "find" a few more votes, that Trump and his people launched a mass legal offensive with no evidence to show, that Trump whipped up a crowd and sent them to congress, none of these are lies. None of these are subjective, and none of these are about "The Press".
Whatever you think of the democrats, so far I've seen nothing along the lines of "attempted coup" come from their camp.
You seem to be living in some sort of denial with your 'both sides' stuff here.
The list goes on and on.
> left injecting politics and other issues (e.g. Trans and race topics) into primary school
I'm not sure that this is actually a thing. But if you have any - reliable - reporting or study about that, I'd be willing to be - hehe - educated.
Do you any reporting or study in that regard?
I am also an outsider. You have to be careful with this. You clearly don't see the bigger picture and it's bad to push the narrative that it was just Trump.
The probability that the election was fraudulent is in question. Biden is the most popular president in history, as per his own words. Though also from his own mouth he has the most extensive voting fraud org. They never quite explained that one.
>It's beyond party politics at that point.
If the election was fraudulent. What was the actions taken?
https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/30/politics/voter-suppression-re...
CNN is obviously biased and is portraying it as 'voting rights under attack' but what does it say? It says the republicans as a whole saw the election was fraudulent and needed to fix voting rules. The republicans cant just say the election was fraudulent and leave the country or something. You go and do exactly what CNN is describing.
No, it's not. There has been nothing but hot air on this, I've followed it closely, there is no evidence of fraud.
> Though also from his own mouth he has the most extensive voting fraud org.
Oh jesus, that was a quote about a voter protection program taken out of context, this is stupid. You accuse me of not seeing the bigger picture and then you use a meme as evidence.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-fact-check-biden-voter-pr...
> It says the republicans as a whole saw the election was fraudulent
Republicans saw fraud because their leaders have lied to them, over and over again. They think voting rules need to be fixed because their leaders have, absent any evidence at all, repeatedly lied to them about fraud that they once again, have no evidence for.
The republican party have gone off the rails and Trump explicitly attempted to overturn the democratic process.