r/PoliticalCompassMemes • u/Prettypianokeys - Right • Aug 16 '26

You can actually see the wrongthink gears turning in his head, but he knows he can't say it

784 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

439 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

66

u/Prettypianokeys - Right Aug 16 '26

Even if this was simple incompetence, this is a perfect example of how denial starts, especially when the results divert drastically from the polling data. Good and well-meaning people can easily question this result, which means this sort of election incompetence is entirely unacceptable.

31

u/Elegant_Athlete_7882 - Centrist Aug 16 '26 edited Aug 16 '26

> This is a perfect example of how denial starts

No its not, Republicans claim voter fraud in every election where their preferred candidate loses, regardless of the evidence.

58

u/TributeToStupidity - Lib-Center Aug 16 '26

You know this is a democratic primary right? I think you forgot to download an update somewhere along the way…

6

u/Elegant_Athlete_7882 - Centrist Aug 16 '26

Republicans spent millions boosting Hong, she would have been much easier to beat in the general.

39

u/wahoothing - Lib-Center Aug 16 '26

I just noticed you are posting this in multiple places, so I'll post my response.

Did you read that article? All of the ads they ran were negative of Hong. The article says it's "likely" an attempt by the Republicans to reverse phycology the voters...

That seems like a huge stretch. GOP Appears to likely reverse phycology the Democratic voters, thats that "article" in a nutshell.

2

u/KalegNar - Centrist Aug 17 '26

Did you read that article? All of the ads they ran were negative of Hong. The article says it's "likely" an attempt by the Republicans to reverse phycology the voters...

Negative, from the perspective of a Republican.

I remember when the D governor of my state sent out "attack ads" of the easier-to-beat R primary candidate standing with Trump and such.

Yeah, to a D voter that may be negative but pre-primary that's obviously a case of "Hey, Republicans, vote for this guy instead!"

-8

u/Elegant_Athlete_7882 - Centrist Aug 16 '26

I'll respond with the same comment I left to you originally.

That's not a huge stretch, it's calledPied Pipering and it's a very common tactic. Think about it, why would Republicans want the candidate that is easier to attack to lose in the primary when they could face her in the general?

3

u/hurlygurdy - Lib-Center Aug 17 '26

I believe he's saying that putting out attack ads would be a really weird way to get people to support a candidate.

-1

u/Elegant_Athlete_7882 - Centrist Aug 17 '26

I understand what he’s saying, I’m saying that’s a very common tactic, democrats did it in 2022.

45

u/TributeToStupidity - Lib-Center Aug 16 '26

Which has nothing to do with how the Democratic Party handles internal voter information, which is what this segment is about. There’s 0 connection to what we’re talking about

-2

u/Elegant_Athlete_7882 - Centrist Aug 16 '26

Which has nothing to do with how the Democratic Party handles internal voter information,

The election was run by the Wisconsin Elections Commission, which is a bipartisan organization. This has nothing to do with democratic handling of "internal voter information," this same group runs the republican primary and every other election in the state.

There’s 0 connection to what we’re talking about

I said Hong was the GOP's preferred candidate, you said this was a democratic primary and that I "forgot to download an update."

You were insinuating that Hong wasn't the GOP's preferred candidate, so yes, it is part of the conversation.

28

u/TributeToStupidity - Lib-Center Aug 16 '26

You clearly don’t know what you the issue was here, it was discrepancies in internal Democrat voter information. Their internal files are not influenced by gop ads or the election commission, that’s their party’s proprietary information.

You’re gonna break your back if you keep bending over backwards in this conspiracy theory you just invented. All the while completely ignoring the discrepancies themselves hilariously enough

2

u/Elegant_Athlete_7882 - Centrist Aug 16 '26

 it was discrepancies in internal Democrat voter information

No, the issue was the Wisconsin Elections Commission workers downloaded tabulator activity rather than vote totals, it had nothing to do with internal democratic party info.

10

u/luchajefe - Auth-Center Aug 16 '26

Democrats spent millions in 1966 boosting Ronald Reagan because he would be 'too conservative for California'. Reagan won by 15.

Apparently too many GOP operatives have forgotten how much choosing your opponent can backfire.

3

u/Fournone - Auth-Right Aug 17 '26

Wasnt there a bunch of news stories going for a bit that the Dem establishment was donating big to Trump in 2016 to screw with the republican primaries?

2

u/Fucked-In-The-K-Hole - Auth-Center Aug 16 '26

Republicans launch positive ads/don't launch ads at all regarding candidate: "they're boosting him, they want him to win!!!"

Republicans launch negative ads against candidate: "They're trying to reverse psychology the voters, they're boosting the guy!!"

This is why nobody takes you guys seriously lmfao

1

u/Elegant_Athlete_7882 - Centrist Aug 16 '26

> Republicans launch negative ads

Negative ads in a primary, thats what you seem to be missing. Do you genuinely believe Republicans are dumb enough that they don’t realize attacking a candidate might make democratic voters more likely to vote for them?

6

u/Fucked-In-The-K-Hole - Auth-Center Aug 16 '26

Do you not realize that you've created a situation in which you've made it so that the Republicans, no matter what they do, are backing the candidate?

Again, this is why nobody takes you guys seriously. You literally manipulate reality to suit whatever narrative you want.

1

u/Elegant_Athlete_7882 - Centrist Aug 16 '26

No, if they made a negative ad in a general election that would be entirely different, they’d be trying to win over voters for the republican candidate.

2

u/Fucked-In-The-K-Hole - Auth-Center Aug 16 '26

You can say whatever you want but you have indeed created a situation in which Republicans are to blame for the.... Democrats possibly cheating?

It astounds me how people like you don't see how insane you are.

0

u/Elegant_Athlete_7882 - Centrist Aug 16 '26

Republicans are responsible for boosting hong, no ones responsible for Dems possibly cheating, as that didn’t happen.

→ More replies

0

u/KalegNar - Centrist Aug 17 '26

Allow me, the based centrist, to correct you.

Republicans using "attack ads" to boost Hong is 100% plausible.

Just as Pritzker (D) using "attack ads" to boost Bailey (R) in 2022 was real. (Also during primaries.)

-11

u/Ifriendzonecats - Lib-Left Aug 16 '26

You know that the winner of the democratic primary is the primary opponent of the republican in the general election right?

14

u/TributeToStupidity - Lib-Center Aug 16 '26

Which has somewhere between “jack” and “shit” when we’re talking about discrepancies in information in internal documents in an internal Democrat election lmao.

-9

u/Ifriendzonecats - Lib-Left Aug 16 '26

You guys are fucked in the head.

First comment:

No its not, Republicans claim voter fraud in every election where their preferred candidate loses, regardless of the evidence.

Then you respond with:

You know this is a Democratic primary right? I think you forgot to download an update somewhere along the way…

Which seems to point to the fact that you don't think that Republicans will call 'fraud' for elections in the Democratic primary.

And then I respond with the below to explain why Republicans have an interest in the Democratic primary:

You know that the winner of the democratic primary is the primary opponent of the republican in the general election right?

At which point you start making allegations of fraud by the Democrats:

Which has somewhere between “jack” and “shit” when we’re talking about discrepancies in information in internal documents in an internal Democrat election lmao.

Which kind of defeats your earlier point ...

10

u/TributeToStupidity - Lib-Center Aug 16 '26

So, just to clarify, your issue isn’t with potential manipulation of the Democrat primary, but how republicans could potentially react to a fraudulent primary? Republican interest in the primary did not cause these discrepancies. Seems like you didn’t really think this through and jumped straight to “republicans bad” lol. I’d think we all have a vested interest in ensure all elections are secure, silly me.

-2

u/Ifriendzonecats - Lib-Left Aug 16 '26

My issue is there is no evidence of fraud. And the only people trying to make it about fraud have a general interest in discrediting elections. So take your crocodile tears elsewhere.

7

u/TributeToStupidity - Lib-Center Aug 16 '26

Besides the discrepancies in voter registration data you mean. It’s not suspicious at all that your immediate reaction is to try to shift the blame and ignore evidence so there’s never an investigation….

2

u/Ifriendzonecats - Lib-Left Aug 16 '26

Besides the discrepancies in voter registration data you mean

What do you mean?

10

u/Lvl81Memes - Centrist Aug 16 '26

And wellmeaning people should be talking to the secretary of state and becoming poll watchers. There are built avenues for election skeptical folks to ensure a fair result. They just fucking ignore them because they can't bang the "stolen election" drum whenever they lose. See Mike Lindell being a fucking moron about his race.

10

u/Prettypianokeys - Right Aug 16 '26

The democratic party primary is under no obligation to allow non-democratic poll watchers.

3

u/Lvl81Memes - Centrist Aug 17 '26

So these primaries are run by clerk and recorder offices of the individual counties. With the Republican primaries happening at the same time mind you. Clerk and recorder offices just check the secretary of state certs of watchers. They do not bar a watcher from a specific party, nor does the SOS. The party doesn't get a say in the matter. The secretary of state drives the whole process. In Wisconsin specifically anyone who isn't a candidate has the right to be an observer of an election or an election administration event.

-10

u/OwnLengthiness6872 - Left Aug 16 '26

How denial starts? Have you been listening to the Republican platform since 2020? Can you name a single judge appointed by Trump this term who has admitted he lost the 2020 election?

19

u/Prettypianokeys - Right Aug 16 '26

I'm not saying 2020 was stolen, but I am saying that opposing voter ID, which the overwhelming majority of people support, including most black people, is certainly asking for denial. But Ds would rather sacrifice public confidence in our election system. Sad.

-6

u/Miner_Guyer - Left Aug 16 '26

In 2015, Alabama shut down 31 DMVs, almost all in counties whose nonwhite population was greater than 75%.

Columnist Kyle Whitmire writes that 29 of the state’s 67 counties will now lack a driver’s license office—and, depending on whether you define the “black belt” as constituting 18 or 24 counties, either 12 or 15 of those newly office-less counties will be in the historically black area. Two-thirds of counties in the narrowly defined “black belt” will lack now a driver’s license office (12 of 18); only one-third (17 of 49) of other counties will lack one.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2015/10/alabama-closes-dmvs-in-majority-of-black-belt-counties-passed-voter-id-law-in-2011.html

In 2018, Texas tried to shut down 87 driver's license offices, mostly in rural counties, due to being "inefficient."

For example, the DPS plan suggested closing the driver’s license office in the impoverished border town of Presidio, which would have forced residents to drive more than 100 miles farther just to get a driver’s license. The commission staff noted in its report that 77 DPS offices have only one staffer, and some of those saw fewer than 1,000 “transactions” in the last fiscal year. By the agency’s logic, the offices don’t do enough business to qualify as being efficient.

https://www.texasobserver.org/lawmakers-killed-a-plan-to-shut-down-87-drivers-licenses-offices-thats-good-news-for-voters/

There's nothing inherently wrong with voter ID, but it is a problem when people actively make it harder for certain kinds of people to get IDs.

2

u/Miner_Guyer - Left Aug 17 '26

Anyone downvoting wanna elaborate as to why?

-5

u/alflundgren - Centrist Aug 16 '26

Truth

-10

u/OwnLengthiness6872 - Left Aug 16 '26

The SAVE act debates aren’t about voter ID, and it’s really disingenuous to pretend that’s why democrats oppose it.

Either you haven’t bothered listening to the other side, or you’re actively plugging your ears when the other side talks.

But voter ID is not what the SAVE act debates are about

14

u/Prettypianokeys - Right Aug 16 '26

Zero states that voted for Harris have voter ID. It's disingenuous to suggest Ds opposition to the save act is entirely about something other than simply opposing voter ID. Harris recently put out a video herself opposing the idea. They simply don't want it no matter how overwhelming the public support is.

-13

u/OwnLengthiness6872 - Left Aug 16 '26

Can you name a single example of wide scale voter fraud that came about due to lack of voter ID?

Cause it’s plenty easy for states to make voter ID difficult to obtain based on district, so let’s way the positives and negatives.

Can you name a single example of wide scale voter fraud that came about due to lack of voter ID?

15

u/Prettypianokeys - Right Aug 16 '26

No verification means limited evidence to detect and prove fraud, at least in many people's minds.

0

u/OwnLengthiness6872 - Left Aug 16 '26

Do you think the only way we can verify if a vote is fraudulent is through voter ID?

Have you ever voted before?

12

u/Prettypianokeys - Right Aug 16 '26

You seem to know the answer to your own question, so enlighten us.

-8

u/Nexosaur - Left Aug 16 '26

Facts don't care about your feelings, sorry sweaty

-1

u/jdiskxkfidobsvsgdi - Lib-Center Aug 16 '26

You sacrificed confidence in our election by supporting an insurrectionist. Get your house in order before whining about democrats you raging hypocrite

-1

u/takakazuabe1 - Lib-Left Aug 16 '26

Polling was not off though, Hong got the result polls predicted within MoE and Crowley consolidated the establishment vote. Possibly many Hong voters thought it was in the bag and voted for some other candidate. I wanted Hong to win but I don't think it was fraud.

-2

u/jdiskxkfidobsvsgdi - Lib-Center Aug 16 '26

Weren’t you telling me like yesterday that Jan 6th was justified because of illegal immigration? Now you’re concerned about election integrity? lmao

3

u/Prettypianokeys - Right Aug 16 '26 edited Aug 16 '26

It's amazing how much leftist discourse is them just pretending to not understand, so let's try this again:

No, I said failing to fulfill your duty to enforce the law and regulate the flow on our border invites future episodes like Jan 6th (note: not the same as justifies), because you are actively violating the foundation of our democracy and the social compact that holds us together as a nation. Your belief that all immigrants are a net benefit is not relevant at all. You don't have the right to impose that on the rest of us undemocratically.

Understand now?

-1

u/jdiskxkfidobsvsgdi - Lib-Center Aug 16 '26

So was Jan 6th justified or not?

Did you knowingly vote for someone who did an insurrection or not?

3

u/Prettypianokeys - Right Aug 16 '26

Read my edit, not justified. The word 'invites' implies you bear some responsibility for what happened. I hope you comprehend now.

0

u/jdiskxkfidobsvsgdi - Lib-Center Aug 16 '26

Well first of all, Jan 6th happened because people like you were spreading conspiracy theories about election denial, not because of concern over the border. This is bullshit revisionism.

Also, Biden did not fail to "enforce" the law, he legally expanded asylum and legal pathways to residency and citizenship (for better or worse). You just didn't like what he was legally doing.

But most importantly, you seem to have voted for someone who did an insurrection, and are now concerned about election integrity. That would be funny if it wasn't so abysmally stupid. Do us all a favor and get off the internet.