We’ll soon find out.
Is there any evidence that Comey’s announcement that they were looking at the laptop changed one vote? I find it hard to believe that late in the game someone needed that to convince them.
I’m not sure what evidence of Trump’s 180 degree pivot into mature statesmanship you’re seeing over there, because it isn’t airing in the States. Nonetheless, it’s Inauguration Day; Trump was on his best behavior. The manchild was in his Sunday best, reciting his lines like a good boy, but I guarantee you he was itching to get out of his uncomfortable suit and go back to playing in the mud.
I can’t imagine it changed more than a handful of voters from “glad to vote for Clinton” to “glad to vote for Trump”. It may well have been zero such voters.
OTOH, I can imagine it caused a number of “hold my nose & vote for Clinton” voters to change to “That does it! I can’t stand to vote at all”. If that happened enough in the relevant districts it could indeed have made all the difference.
The social media nature of how news now gets around means that some subgroups get inundated with any given news-bite and the group pile-on effects that follow. The national average impact may be close to zero whereas in one or another corner the effect is profound.
We’ll never know for sure.
A poster shared their experience at the polling place - voting for one candidate, changing their mind and having to void their ballot and get a new one so they could vote for the other candidate. If someone was that conflicted on election day, it’s not hard to believe that there were some people who made up their minds after Comey’s announcement.
This is the same Constitution that originally said that John Lewis was only 3/5 of a human and could legally be considered property. I can’t really fault him for not taking the position, “It’s in the Constitution, therefore its unquestionable truth.”
If you are seriously asking for only one vote, then, yes, I know of (at least!) one person who changed his vote because of the FBI director’s announcement.
If you want evidence for a significant change in votes, look at the tracking polls, which showed a very large hit against Clinton after the announcement.
For those who can’t read [the news] or do not understand it…
The reason Trump’s election is illegitimate is due to PROPAGANDA and FALSE NEWS STORIES spread by Russia!
These fictitious stories caused many people to vote for Trump instead of Hillary.
Or in other words… THEY CHEATED!
If you do not think these things can influence people’s actions, then you might want to learn about advertising, propaganda, psychology, and psychological warfare.
Russia. Non-disclosure of tax returns.
Sure and some voted for Vermin Supreme but that doesn’t mean much.
One article from Politico right before the election said there wasn’t a significant change. At the same time an article in 538 said there was a shift but they couldn’t tell what it meant. And of course the polls were wrong anyway so how do we really know? I guess I’m asking if anyone relooked at the data or did further research to see if it made a difference in the election.
The polls were not wrong. They accurately showed that Clinton had more popular support than Trump.
The problem is that analysts forgot that national figures are meaningless when it comes to electing the president. What counts is the state-by-state breakdown.
It’s like looking at a geographic map of the U.S. and assuming that because so much territory is red, that means more people voted Republican, when really, you only see large territories because so few people live there. Looking at a map provides a false interpretation of voting results and patterns.
Well, it means that we can be sure that people were undecided that late in the game. Enough people to shift the election? Who knows?
That’s not how polling works. Sure, they do national polls, but they also do state polls, and then use the results of those to figure out an electoral college map
And the national polls were wrong, too, BTW. Because the way a poll works is that they ask people, then adjust for the population and “likely voters.” Same with state polls.
And, as 538 said, the polls weren’t off by more than they were last election. They were just off in a direction that mattered this time.
Well, I have to admit you have a point there. 
I figure just like those who didn’t like President Obama harped on his birth-nation and all that other stuff for 8 years, now we’re going to have the same kind of stuff from me and my friends about President (Lord it feels funny typing that) Trump. The best we can hope for is that this time around its only 4 years.
I think the charge that Trump is illegitimate is based on four ideas:
- He won the electoral college, but Clinton won the most votes; in essence this is arguing that his presidency should have an asterisk in the history books;
- There are questions whether the Russian government interfered in our election and more importantly, that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government to undermine our democracy;
- He appears to be in violation of the constitution from day 1, by not severing his business ties in foreign countries; while it seems unlikely that the Republican controlled Congress is willing to pursue this matter, it doesn’t change the fact that Trump appears to be impeachable from day 1;
- He has repeatedly violated the norms of our democracy including calling on his supporters to commit acts of violence. Note, I’m not only saying that Trump supporters have committed acts of violence, but that Trump himself has called for violence.
What I think people are trying to convey with the charge that Trump is not a legitimate president is that because of these four things, he does not have a political mandate; that members of Congress and state governors and legislators should not interpret Trump’s win as a blank check to push through his radical agenda. Constantly reinforcing this message will be important in trying to hamstring Trump and prevent his most egregious abuses.
I think it’s pretty clear that Russia deliberately influenced the election, and moderately probable that the Trump campaign colluded with them to do it. But I don’t think that makes his presidency illegitimate. People have the right to vote the way they want, for whatever reason they want. If some guy votes for Clinton because he believes little green men came out of his breakfast cereal and told him to do it, he still has the right to have his vote count.
The fact that Trump hasn’t severed his business ties in foreign countries seems to make him impeachable, all right, but that’s different from making his presidency illegitimate. Impeachment requires a legal process that hasn’t been implemented. It’s like saying ‘Convicted felons aren’t allowed to own guns in our state, and we have incontrovertible evidence that this guy committed a burglary, therefore his legally registered gun is in fact illegally held.’ No it’s not, even though he did commit the burglary - not until he’s tried and convicted.
The electoral college completely baffles me. Instead of ‘One person, one vote’ you’ve got ‘Well, one person 1.2 votes, or maybe one person 0.63 votes, depending on where you happen to live.’ And so you end up with a president whom the voters unarguably didn’t choose, and you go around calling him ‘democratically elected’. Various people have tried to explain to me why that shouldn’t be considered batshit insane, but it hasn’t worked.
eclectic wench, I find your position baffling. You say that Trump probably colluded with the Russian government to influence our election; this included the illegal hacking of Americans’ computers, by the way; and yet you shrug and say so what. Likewise, yeah he’s probably impeachable, but so what?
I guess, I’m naïve enough to still care about my country and to want its leader to not be a criminal in debt to a hostile government.
After the impeachment he’ll be found to be illegitimate. Until then he’s merely alleged to be illegitimate.
That difference is the whole and entire point of a system of law. You don’t try people unless you have suspicion. Which we surely do right now about Trump. But you also don’t punish before conviction under whichever rules are appropriate, be that traffic court, felony court, or political impeachment.
What nonsense, we are talking about public perception of a politician in an ostensibly democratic nation, not findings in a court. If the majority of the people find their leader lacks legitimacy, then he is illegitimate.
Look at the aggregated polls. Clinton was ahead by 5.6% on Oct. 27, the day before Comey’s announcement. A week later the gap had narrowed to 1.3%. That’s not conclusive proof, but I don’t recall any other event or news that could have moved the polls so much. I’m sure you recall Comey’s announcement dominated the political news that weekend.