How much of a mandate did the American electorate hand the Democrats?
Asked by
crazyguy (
3207
)
November 7th, 2020
Biden scored more popular votes than Hillary did. And, of course, he won the Electoral College.
BUT the Democrats lost House seats and may end up picking only 1 seat on the Senate.
So my questions is, is the country leaning overwhelmingly one way? If not, should the Democrats be careful with what they do?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
55 Answers
If anyone need be careful, it will be all of us as a whole.
How careful were the Republicans? It takes no “care” to pretend to govern through recalcitrant obstructionism. A do nothing Senate at the service of a vindictive destructive no nothing President amounts to a destructive waste and insult to us all. Good riddance to both.
The country does not lean overwhelmingly one way.
I said 4 years ago the popular vote was very close.
I say this time the popular vote is fairly close.
The country is fairly divided politically. I don’t know why anyone uses the word mandate in American politics.
@JLeslie Before the election, people (myself included) thought we were in for a BLUE WAVE the likes of which we have never seen. Well, the BLUE WAVE turned out to be just a whimper. Biden and Harris are happy now, but watch their joy and expectations turn to despair in months. Of course, as they realize the difficulties of implementing blue sky proposals made without any information or context, they may actually experience a change of heart, anyway.
@crazyguy More people voted and there were a lot of votes for both candidates. Maybe Republicans should stop the shenanigans of trying to prevent people from voting.
The mandate was that if the Dems want to win anything going forward they will have to cheat. Which they are okay with since there is no down side to them doing so.
@seawulf575 You really are a bigot aren’t you? All Democrats are dishonest lying cheater criminals. Got it. The Republicans who voted for Biden must be horrible people too.
The only way Trump could lose is cheating?
Even though the country in the past 6 or 7 elections gave the popular vote to the Democrat.
Republicans did well down ticket.
Just stop.
@JLeslie I think the provisions in place try to ensure that:
1. The registered voter is the one who votes for himself or herself.
2. Only qualified US citizens can register to vote.
If the Democrats could ensure that those two requirements are met, there is not a court in the whole country who dare go against making it easier for the citizenry to cast their ballots.
I think that, moving forward, we should look to Big Tech to give us safe and secure online voting. Identities would be checked by facial recognition and a fingerprint or cornea scan . Privacy concerns may have to be addressed, but they should be.
People without computers and/or internet can vote at the local library.
@crazyguy I like the paper ballot, because I like the paper trail. When I lived in TN it was all touch screen voting, and it always made me a little uneasy. Online seems even more able to hack. Maybe I could be convinced, but for now I’m not on board.
The states do things to hurt some voters. Some states have the polls close at 6pm. If people work it is difficult for them to get to the polls. They might have early voting, but sometimes early voting is only one location in a county. Some states still don’t have no reason needed mail-in voting, or had it for covid and it will expire.
I agree courts will follow the laws and err on the side of allowing the voter to vote within the law, but we had congressman trying to put forth bills to compromise a persons ability to vote. I don’t remember if I posted on this Q the bill Senator Scott in my state proposed that would make all ballots not counted within 24 hours of election day void. He hid it among seemingly good intentions to standardize elections. Just wondering what do you think of that idea? Let’s say you are sick, God forbid, and you mail in your ballot three weeks before the election, and it arrive well before election day. It is sitting in a stack of ballots waiting to be counted and oops it does not get counted before the day after elections day so, even though you the voter did everything right, under Scott’s plan your vote is paper for the birdcage. How can any American citizen think that is ok?
1. The registered voter is the one who votes for himself or herself.
2. Only qualified US citizens can register to vote.
If the Democrats could ensure that those two requirements are met,
They are met. Republicans have been howling about fraud for decades and have never uncovered any examples.
It’s just a talking point to keep the impressionable and uninformed stirred up and angry. They thank you for complying.
@Jleslie Let me give you one example of how easing voting restrictions opens the door to fraud. The Nevada legislature met in the dead of night to pass AB 4, that requires mail-in ballots to be sent to all registered voters. Nothing wrong with that, that I can see. Provided your voter registration rolls are truly up-to-date. In most states that is not the case. Therefore, how about adding one little twist. Send out postcards to all voters, asking a simple yes-or-no question: Would you like to receive your ballot by mail? The postcard can be mailed back with the answer and a signature. That way you get some assurance that the voter is still alive. lives at the address you show on file, and you get a head start on signature matching. However, both Nevada and California chose to not do that. Why?
@crazyguy How do you figure head start on signature matching? When you register you sign the form. When you return the actual ballot is when the signature counts.
If people are upset with sending a ballot to every registered voter then in 2021 maybe the legislature can argue that point and require people to request a mail-in ballot.
Still, let’s remember these ballots you are worried about are going to households. You would need a ballot to arrive at a house that has a criminal living there to get a fraudulent vote. How often do you think that actually happens? Most people are not going to risk prison to submit an extra vote, aside from the fact that most people would consider unethical in the first place.
Also, the way I understand it, California didn’t have number codes on your ballots, is that right? My ballot has a number code, so it is traceable to me. If I was dead and it shows I voted, the vote could easily be voided. I can see why some people might not want a number code on ballots, I can see arguments for and against.
I want to add I was thinking about your illegible post mark question from the other day, and aside from USPS being able to segregate ballots that are late. If for some reason that didn’t happen, I would think if a postmark was in question then would be judged by a Republican and Democrat team to evaluate the envelope. They don’t know what vote is inside.
@JLeslie Your very reasonable response highlights the difference between you and some other posters.
Let me address your points one by one.
1. The signature on the postcard can be matched against the one on the voter roll to ensure that the voter requesting the ballot is the right one.
2. California law before Newsom issued his executive order did exactly that. Anybody who requested a mail-in ballot was issued one, no excuse needed.
3. I wouldn’t worry about individual households. However, I would worry about paid ballot harvesters.
4. The number code can be traced back to you. BUT it does not ensure that you are the one who actually voted as you saw fit.
5. There is a possibility of a rogue post office employee. There is already a sworn affidavit about one.
@crazyguy
3. So, what are you picturing? Paid ballot harvesters go house to house asking if people have extra ballots sent to them that weren’t their own. Then, these ballot harvesters fill out the ballot and sign just like the dead person? Just randomly get lucky with the signature?
4. If I look up my ballot and it shows received and counted and I never voted, I’m calling elections right away.
Do you think Republicans are doing some fraud too? Just curious.
@JLeslie
3. I think we have talked about the process before. The paid harvester who is short a few ballots to hit his/her quota?
4. You know enough and care enough about the issues to actually give a damn. Do you think there are some who couldn’t care less, and would gladly sell their ballot for a few bucks?
@crazyguy My point was that guy was a Republican operative, but every post by every Republican is how Democrats are dishonest thieves.
I really don’t think there is a lot of fraud. If there is some I don’t think it’s enough to change the election.
@JLeslie And my point is fraud is possible and is encouraged by paying ballot harvesters.
@crazyguy How much is that even happening? I have never seen any information on people being paid to collect ballots. My friend didn’t receive her ballot. Let’s say it went to the wrong person. The ballot was never cast, but anyway she went in and voted so her other ballot is void. There are checks in the system. We want it to be an honest vote, it is impossible to make it perfect, but we can make it as fraud proof as possible.
I think a lot of people voted for Biden, that’s just how it is. Not surprising Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Georgia came into play. Pennsylvania has a lot of Democrats, Arizona has Cindy McCain, and Georgia has the legacy of slavery (large Black population) with a massive get out the vote initiative for a couple of years now and a large amount of people who live their from other states. A lot of people voted for Trump too, the turnout was massive.
Just saw on CNN a report that dead people voting was investigated in Michigan and there was not one instance of a dead person on the voter rolls casting a ballot. The spokeswoman for the Secretary of State made a statement about it saying there is a deceased flag that would be triggered, plus there is the signature check as an additional safety.
There are Republican Secretaries of State, Republican Supervisors of Elections, Republicans all over who are responsible for the voting in their states saying the vote is clean.
Trump supporters simply don’t want to listen to anyone else except what will make their story true in their mind. The CNN story about Stop the Steal proves it. Totally ignorant about voting laws, ignoring what TRUMP SAID about the Red Wave for in person voting and mail-in being blue.
@JLeslie I personally agree with you that unless a systemic problem/pattern can be proved, we’ll never find enough instances of fraud to reverse the decision. Should Trump concede and give up the legal challenges? Absolutely not. Even Al Gore did not concede in 2000.
We have to establish the truth. Even you must admit that mail-in voting presents far more opportunities for fraud than in-person voting.
I have no problem with Trump putting up challenges or asking for recounts where warranted. Let’s let the challenges happen so everyone feels sure.
I have a problem with people so stupid that they can’t think their way out of a box. The woman at the beginning doesn’t care about the law. She doesn’t even believe it is the law. These people can’t understand why Biden’s numbers went up when mail-in was being counted. Really?
I tell Democrats that the news spinning and editing Trump’s statements hurts our cause, because it give Republicans something to tear apart. I would give the same advice to Republicans, don’t line yourselves up with these dingbats.
I’m not saying you are agreeing with the people in this video, but a hell of a lot of people in the Republican party are.
@JLeslie Just to prove to you that I am not a blind Trump supporter, I personally never agreed with the Second Amendment – until the BLM protests started hitting close to home. I am not a rah-rah Trump supporter. However, unlike other Presidents since the Second World War, Trump gets things done. If he were against the Second Amendment, you can bet your bottom dollar that something would have been done about it by now.
@crazyguy I personally never agreed with the Second Amendment – until the BLM protests started hitting close to home.
So…what exactly does a “well regulated militia” have to the BLM? And would you have felt the same if it were the Proud Boys or Boogaloo Boys who were protesting?
@crazyguy I’ve always supported the second amendment, just with reasonable regulation. I am completely against protestors carrying guns. Mobs with firearms is insane to me, and terrorizing.
@Strauss Might want to get the entire 2nd amendment before you try making a point.
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
A well regulated militia is only part of the amendment. “Being necessary to the security of a free state” is the next. That indicates that people might need to go into service to protect theselves and their country from threats, including a corrupt government or individuals or groups that are threatening. And “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” is the last part. It says that people should have the right to own AND carry arms.
Now, let’s apply that entire thing to your statement. Keeping and bearing arms has quite a bit to do with BLM. After all, over the past few months in this country, BLM and their adherents (including Antifa) have attack individuals, taken over parts of cities, threatened people, killed people and have generally been a menace. If one of these idiotic “protests” that devolve into looting, rioting, assault, and arson starts up near your home, having some way to protect yourself is vital.
As for the Proud Boys or the Boogaloo Boys being the source of the need for a gun? So far I haven’t seen the size, violence, nor frequency of any of their protests when compared to BLM. So trying to deflect away from your heroes BLM is a weak effort. Whataboutism. But if they were getting out of hand and threatening you or your family, by all means…grab a gun!
@seawulf575 my “statement” was actually two questions. You answered my first question with a thoughtful answer. Thanks for that. I too support the Second Amendment, as I do the rest of The Constitution. I think sometimes the part that refers to the militia is overlooked.
My second question was more of a “what if”. Allow me to elucidate:
What if… instead of the BLM, widespread demonstrations were organized and promoted be a right-wing more conservative organization, say Oath Keepers or Three Percenters. Maintaining the parallel, what if these demonstrations led to rioting and looting, which may or may not have been directly connected to the original demonstrations.
In that hypothetical situation would you feel a need to “grab a gun”, like the McCloskeys did in Missouri?
The term “mandate” has been overused by political victors since George W. Bush used it in 2000. However, I do think it’s significant that there was a record turnout.
@Strauss If you read my entire answer I answered both your questions. If it was any group, the answer remains the same. But again….you don’t see the looting and rioting from the right. The only violence I can remember them being involved in was Charlottesville VA. And that was peaceful until BLM and Antifa showed up looking for a fight.
@Strauss The BLM is not a well-regulated militia. In fact most firearm owners are not part of any well-regulated militia.
Whether it is the BLM or the Proud Boys indulging in senseless violence makes no difference to me. I would feel the need to protect myself.
@JLeslie It finally happened. We agreed on something. But the devil is in the details. Your definition of reasonable regulation probably does not agree with that of the far right.
@seawulf575 @Strauss Interesting points. In my opinion, the Second Amendment is the worst written part of the Constitution. It makes zero sense. No wonder the Supreme Court has had difficulty with its interpretation over the years.
What exactly did the framers intend? I think it is obvious that they were afraid of a government that became too powerful. However, in this day and age, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible to match the might of our military. Therefore, no matter how loosely the Second Amendment is interpreted, it cannot make the citizenry capable of withstanding a determined takeover by the government. A well-armed citizenry can make the venture expensive; but it would definitely be more expensive for the citizenry than the military.
The McCloskeys, in my opinion, were well within their rights to take up their guns. Their grounds had been trespassed on, and, if the rioters were not deterred, they would have carried the trespass into the house.
@Call_Me_Jay I think more right-wing terrorists have firearms compared to BLM and Antifa members, primarily because of economic and ideological differences. Therefore, I do not dispute what you are saying here.
However, it is also true that the violence and looting since George Floyd’s death have been carried out primarily by individuals associated with BLM and Antifa.
Obviously the Presidency itself is the “mandate” that matters. As Trump has more than amply demonstrated, the power for good or destruction is the “mandate”
Response moderated
@seawulf575 You seem confused. You claimed conservatives weren’t violent. I showed otherwise. Nothing you posted diminishes that.
@Call_Me_Jay Shootings of a few individuals do not prove a pattern of being violent. Nor do the recent riots. However, I would hate to meet either of the two groups, white supremacists or BLM supporters, on a dark street.
@crazyguy I assume you were directing that at seawulf. Or if you’re trying to claim hundreds of murders are not a pattern, never mind. That dishonesty isn’t worth responding to.
@Call_Me_Jay I am not sure what “dishonesty” you are referring to. I dutifully went through your links and found several instances of single murders allegedly committed by white supremacists. On the other hand I witnessed on TV the atrocities committed by BLM and Antifa. I stated that neither of those two things prove a pattern of being violent. So where is the dishonesty?
@crazyguy It’s gotta be dishonest because you said something negative about the leftists’ street mobs.
@crazyguy I dutifully went through your links and found several instances of single murders allegedly committed by white supremacists.
I gave you 329 examples. Show some integrity. Or be yourself. Whatever. Your choice.
@crazyguy 329 in 25 years is about 13 people per year. There are that many killed in Chicago on a good weekend.
Do they honestly think gang crimes excuse right-wing political terrorism?
At least they recognize that white nationalists are on their team.
Biden won with a margin of six million votes. Hillary garnered three million votes beyond those of the fool. For my money, both episodes were mandate enough. If nothing else, Trump has fully demonstrated the lengths to which that “mandate” can be abused. The world breathed one long sigh of relief at the dummy’s dethroning. And all of us will cheer when he is exiled from office in disgrace to face the torment of legal difficulties that will justifiably define the remainder of his miserable life.
@Call_Me_Jay What’s that matter? You opened the door with sensationalized statements put out by a radical left media. We are putting forth facts that make your overblown idea of how horrible the extreme right wingers look like nothing but sensationalized claims. Yours is pretty much the same tactic the Marxists of BLM use. They make wild claims about how horrible it is that cops kill blacks all the time!!!! But when the facts come out, you find that cops kill unarmed blacks to the tune of about 18 in a given year. That isn’t to say the blacks weren’t attacking them or others, but that they weren’t officially “armed” as determined by later evaluation. You are trying to make right wing extremists look like the biggest threat we have ever seen when the facts you provided showed they aren’t…when you get past the sensationalism
Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
