Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kentuck

(111,052 posts)
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 10:20 AM Dec 2016

If the shoe were on the other foot...

If Donald Trump had beaten Hillary Clinton by almost 3 million votes in the popular vote? But if Hillary had won the electoral vote by only 80,000 votes, over three states, what would be the Republican argument? We can only guess.

But, it they found out that the Russians had interfered in the election, in some manner or other, what would they be saying? They would probably be discussing war with Russia? They would accuse Hillary Clinton of treason and espionage? Who knows?

This is an interesting study in principles and ethics, in my opinion.



35 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
If the shoe were on the other foot... (Original Post) kentuck Dec 2016 OP
Lesson One in the study of principles and ethics: madaboutharry Dec 2016 #1
That's about it! kentuck Dec 2016 #3
in normal circumstances RussBLib Dec 2016 #2
The media would be droning on about treestar Dec 2016 #4
I distinctly remember Rush Limbaugh saying on his radio program Chipper Chat Dec 2016 #8
you forget one thing. Hillary is a woman, and trump is a man. big difference. demigoddess Dec 2016 #22
24/7 news on it . Possible threats to her safety IMO lunasun Dec 2016 #5
They would be impeaching her on 1/21. libtodeath Dec 2016 #6
right bigtree Dec 2016 #7
This, this more than anything shows the hypocrisy of the Republican politicians. Fla Dem Dec 2016 #9
She certainly wouldn't have been entitled to a Supreme Court pick. NT FightingIrish Dec 2016 #10
If they had clear proof that many states were gerrymandered beyond belief -- byronius Dec 2016 #11
Do you feel that gerrymandering had an impact hughee99 Dec 2016 #13
My point concerned only the lock they have on the House using criminally anti-democratic methods. byronius Dec 2016 #27
Crosscheck wasn't about gerrymandering, though, and gerrymandering had no significant impact hughee99 Dec 2016 #30
I've been contemplating the plethora of ways in which Republicans have denigrated the Constitution. byronius Dec 2016 #31
Bush in 2000 had planned to mount challenges had he won the popular but lost electoral vote caraher Dec 2016 #12
Interesting. H2O Man Dec 2016 #14
PS: recommended H2O Man Dec 2016 #15
Republicans Cheat to Win dlk Dec 2016 #16
nah barbtries Dec 2016 #17
If the Russians had interfered on behalf of Clinton NewJeffCT Dec 2016 #18
Amen. treestar Dec 2016 #23
My God! maxrandb Dec 2016 #19
Just tried Fox News site to see how they are framing this lambchopp59 Dec 2016 #20
"Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!" bucolic_frolic Dec 2016 #21
There would have itcfish Dec 2016 #24
so very very true niyad Dec 2016 #25
They would be reacting as we are, and B2G Dec 2016 #26
Not I. byronius Dec 2016 #28
You'd be in a tiny minority B2G Dec 2016 #32
Perhaps, but I don't agree. byronius Dec 2016 #33
Plus, certain practices like Crosscheck and recount-halting are indefensible. byronius Dec 2016 #34
lawsuits in every state. 'rigged, rigged, rigged' spanone Dec 2016 #29
Buildings would be burning and Congressional repukes would threaten to shut the govt NightWatcher Dec 2016 #35

madaboutharry

(40,190 posts)
1. Lesson One in the study of principles and ethics:
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 10:22 AM
Dec 2016

The republican party and its leadership possess neither principles nor ethics.

RussBLib

(9,003 posts)
2. in normal circumstances
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 10:25 AM
Dec 2016

The GOP would be outraged by Russian meddling in our election. But since the GOP benefits, most are just fine with it.

Yet another indication the GOP wants to win at all costs, regardless of the methods.

Blinded by their own lust for power.

To quote Trump: "Sad."

treestar

(82,383 posts)
4. The media would be droning on about
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 10:25 AM
Dec 2016

how Hillary was not really legitimately elected. They would talk about entering the white House under the cloud of sound trouncing in the popular vote. Hillary would address the voters who did not vote for her and tell them she would represent them. The media would focus on that. The media would wonder whether she should not give Trumplethinskin a cabinet position, so as to respect his PV win.

There would be demands for investigation of the hacking the the R Congress would start up one and also examine what Hillary had to do with it. There would be condemnation of Russia across across the media. Talk of how Bill once visited there and speculation of what he had to do with it.

Chipper Chat

(9,672 posts)
8. I distinctly remember Rush Limbaugh saying on his radio program
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 11:36 AM
Dec 2016

3 days before the 2000 election "if Bush wins the popular vote and Gore wins the electoral college there will be so great an outcry from the American people that Gore will never be installed as president." Hmmmmmmmmmmm

demigoddess

(6,640 posts)
22. you forget one thing. Hillary is a woman, and trump is a man. big difference.
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 01:22 PM
Dec 2016

they don't get treated the same.

libtodeath

(2,888 posts)
6. They would be impeaching her on 1/21.
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 10:38 AM
Dec 2016

Kaine too so they could install Ryan and claim it was the will of the people.

bigtree

(85,975 posts)
7. right
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 10:38 AM
Dec 2016

...because defenders of Russia, in this case, are really just defending the Trump campaign politics which enabled, encouraged, and exploited Russian interference in our election.

Fla Dem

(23,586 posts)
9. This, this more than anything shows the hypocrisy of the Republican politicians.
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 11:50 AM
Dec 2016

If the roles were reversed, there would be pitchforks and bonfires and the long knives would be out for Hillary Clinton's head on a spit. And yet they all (with a few exceptions) fall in line and kiss Trump's feet.

What went on is nothing less than an attack on America's Democratic election. It was an act of war on a cyber level. Trump's "let move on attitude" merely reinforces my opinion that he very well knew about the Russian hacking in his favor. That he is and will be a Putin puppet, that he has and will have Russian operatives in his circle of advisers and the cabinet; Paul Manafort & Rex Tillerson to name two.

If Trump reverses Obama's sanctions on Russia, then he will be a traitor and will confirm he is working for the Kremlin.

That the Republican leadership isn't going after him tooth and nail, and have fallen on their knees to suck his dick, disgusts me.

byronius

(7,391 posts)
11. If they had clear proof that many states were gerrymandered beyond belief --
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 11:53 AM
Dec 2016

The union would be dissolved.

As it is.

byronius

(7,391 posts)
27. My point concerned only the lock they have on the House using criminally anti-democratic methods.
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 04:12 PM
Dec 2016

Crosscheck, however, certainly served the American Nazis in the presidential count.

I listened to the Majority Report interview with David Daley. The facts are startling -- the GOP is willing to abrogate the basic contract to gain power, which I find treasonous. I think Kris Kobach belongs in federal prison for the rest of his life.

Seriously, if the Democrats engaged in a tenth of the un-American bullshit the GOP does, I'd be just as angry. As soon as someone embraces these tactics, they commit crimes against the United States of America.

The union has been dissolved. This fake election was the fakiest fake election in US history.

hughee99

(16,113 posts)
30. Crosscheck wasn't about gerrymandering, though, and gerrymandering had no significant impact
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 04:56 PM
Dec 2016

on the presidential vote results.

The reason I asked this question is because I've seen a number of people suggest that gerrymandering has a significant impact on the outcome of the presidential vote. Every time I've seen someone try to explain the connection, though, they've either shown themselves to not really understand what gerrymandering is or how the EC works, or they are talking about congress (but on a thread specifically about the presidential vote). I'm not saying you're wrong at all, but when you mention gerrymandering in a thread about the presidential results, I don't think it's unexpected that people will assume you're talking about the presidential results.

byronius

(7,391 posts)
31. I've been contemplating the plethora of ways in which Republicans have denigrated the Constitution.
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 05:33 PM
Dec 2016

It's an attitude born of absolute contempt for democracy, and indicative of an intent to seize power at any cost.

My statement was intended to expand the focus of the original post. 'Shoe on the other foot' -- if their criminal advantages were reversed to benefit the Democrats, the union would cease to exist much as it already has. Democracy only exists when all citizens respect its requirements, and it is, as James Carville once pointed out, the only alternative to armed combat in the streets.

Karl Rove and Kris Kobach are playing games that may well destroy this nation and the human species. I don't consider the presidential race the only thing we've lost by traitorous, anti-democratic acts, and I think it's important to mention it.

When a Democrat has to win three times the number of votes to achieve parity with Republicans, it's just as destructive to this nation as the Russian knife in our hearts that is Donald Trump.

caraher

(6,278 posts)
12. Bush in 2000 had planned to mount challenges had he won the popular but lost electoral vote
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 11:56 AM
Dec 2016

Of course it turned out the other way. There's no principle to the thing, except grabbing power whenever possible.

While it’s almost forgotten now, the George W. Bush campaign was planning to challenge the results of the 2000 vote if he lost the electoral vote, but won the popular vote. His campaign hoped to spark a national movement to pressure members of the Electoral College in states where the popular vote went for Al Gore to ignore that and instead vote in line with the national popular vote — thus making Bush president.


Gore was even preemptively criticized for winning under these circumstances. It “would be an outrage” said Rep. Ray LaHood, R.-Ill. NBC’s Chris Matthews said that “knowing him as we do, [Gore] may have no problem taking the presidential oath after losing the popular vote to George W. Bush.” (Matthews lost interest in this issue when the opposite occurred. He later said that he himself had voted for Bush in 2000.)

H2O Man

(73,506 posts)
14. Interesting.
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 12:04 PM
Dec 2016

I had thought it was possible, even likely, that Clinton would win the election, while Trump would carry the popular vote. My concern was that this would result in violent incidents in sections of the country.

The issues of possible foreign influence on US elections is difficult on this forum. I've yet to see what I consider an informed, rational discussion here that places the issue in an accurate context.

dlk

(11,512 posts)
16. Republicans Cheat to Win
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 12:32 PM
Dec 2016

With respect to principles and ethics, the ends justify the means for the Republicans. They consistently cheat to win and get away with it.

barbtries

(28,769 posts)
17. nah
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 12:40 PM
Dec 2016

just everyday, run of the mill, to be expected by now, total and utter hypocrisy. it's become another word for republican in my world.

NewJeffCT

(56,828 posts)
18. If the Russians had interfered on behalf of Clinton
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 12:51 PM
Dec 2016

1) it would be a nonstop 24/7 news story that Clinton was an illegitimate president.
2) Republicans in Congress would be out there non stop calling to throw out the election results and have a new election.
3) the Koch Brothers and others would be paying for and busing protesters to Washington DC
4) Trump supporters would likely have caused violence in several locations around the country, targeting people or groups that supported Clinton (Planned Parenthood clinics, Hispanics, Muslims, etc)
5) the media would consider it an act of war by Russia.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
23. Amen.
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 01:40 PM
Dec 2016

What's funny is the call to void the election and have a new one has no basis in law, so Democrats don't do it, realizing they would get nowhere. Republicans would call for it (shame or embarrassment seem not to visit upon them) and even assert they could pass a bill to do it. Hell we already know they were going to start impeachment on Jan. 21. Whereas if the other way round, the Democratic Congress would not impeach until they had a reason. The Republicans would just create a reason.

maxrandb

(15,295 posts)
19. My God!
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 12:51 PM
Dec 2016

Just look at how they reacted after President Obama won 2 back to back Electoral Landslides.

lambchopp59

(2,809 posts)
20. Just tried Fox News site to see how they are framing this
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 01:11 PM
Dec 2016

And from what I can tell, they have already danced the sidestep around this with an article that tacitly admits Trump's claim of fraudulent voters is false.
But just try it:!:
a site search for 2016 vote count, 2016 election count, 2016 popular vote count, 2016 popular vote
all bring up the following results:

Please try the following:
Check your spelling
Try more general words
Try using acronyms or using different keywords
Try using fewer words. Your search might be too specific

I sure as hell can't stomach their teevee vomitus, but if their website is any indicator, they are avoiding the subject.

byronius

(7,391 posts)
28. Not I.
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 04:16 PM
Dec 2016

I don't like anti-democratic tactics no matter who employs them. I'd be looking at the evidence; if the evidence said the Russians elected Hillary, and if the Democrats were using Crosscheck to deny the right to vote to poor and middle-class white conservatives, I'd be just as angry.

The contract is the contract. We either engage in democracy, or we suffer the consequences.

 

B2G

(9,766 posts)
32. You'd be in a tiny minority
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 08:16 PM
Dec 2016

There would be demands for absolute proof that the Russians were involved. There would be rabid defense of the electoral college. Trump would be decried as a sore loser.

Ya'll can deny it, but you know I'm right.

byronius

(7,391 posts)
33. Perhaps, but I don't agree.
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 08:27 PM
Dec 2016

Certainly some would do as you are suggesting. Most people I know would prefer publicly-financed elections with equal air time for the top 100 civil-service presidential exams, just to avoid all this crap.

I want Republicans to feel secure that their vote is being counted. As much as I hate their @%#@ guts, it's either a democracy or it's not. If we were gerrymandering and tabulator-hacking, I would want those practices investigated. Not hard to spot this stuff with dual-party oversight testing. And if a Democrat was responsible, I would want them to go to jail.

I think most Democrats would agree.

byronius

(7,391 posts)
34. Plus, certain practices like Crosscheck and recount-halting are indefensible.
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 08:29 PM
Dec 2016

Unrecountable electronic voting should be absolutely illegal. And it's only in Red States.

Paper ballots, hand-counted, recount for free upon request. It's the American Way.

NightWatcher

(39,343 posts)
35. Buildings would be burning and Congressional repukes would threaten to shut the govt
Fri Dec 30, 2016, 08:47 PM
Dec 2016

trumpanzees would be violently reacting while we speak of petitions and sending emails to D.C.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If the shoe were on the o...