They have no proof and just want to cause doubts around elections so they can pass laws to make it harder for certain populations to vote. Here is an opinion piece about dumbshits that are doing this very thing around my area:
Good luck trying to get these types to provide evidence. They have none.
Exactly so. Before the 2020 election, both Democrats and Republicans embraced vote-by-mail, for example, in various places around the country and elections went uncontested and smoothly. All of a sudden, in 2020 “election integrity” became a big thing, and it’s so easy to cast doubt by just saying words (lies) without having to back up any statements, no matter how crazy. You can’t start bellyaching about vote-by-mail and other existing and proven processes only when your candidate loses. But yeah, the scary thing is recent “integrity” laws getting passed to make it harder for people, certain people, to cast votes.
A good case in point would be the interview Sidney Powell did with the Australian Broadcasting Company last year. When questioned on basic facts, she accused the interviewer of working for Smartmatic and attempted to walk out.
Suppose that an unambiguous antisemite is interviewed. Should they be asked for evidence that Jews control the government? YMMV, but I don’t like that question.
One answer could be – write about them. Quote them even, and then refute the lie if it be one. But don’t interview them.
And then the doubts themselves become the rationale: “X percent of Americans now have doubts about the election, so that is sufficient reason to treat the claim as if it has solid evidence.”
The fundamental problem with vote-by-mail from the GQP perspective is that it undermines one of the basic tactics (insufficient supply of voting sites and machines in neighborhoods inhabited by “those” coughblackcough people) of vote suppression.
Barely. That ratio was 81,268,924 to 74,216,154 as of 2020.
But that 74,216,154 was more than any incumbent president in history! He should have won! Unfair!
One response I heard a few times was: We know the election was stolen. You need an investigation to get the evidence for that.
I see that Chris Christie has made an unqualified statement criticizing Trump’s behavior around the classified documents. George Stephanopolis pressed a number of politicians about it and got a straight and honest answer from him. I continue to believe that confronting Republicans with such a direct statement and asking for them to comment would be a way to begin to break through this ridiculous wall of refusal and stonewalling about the election. Just because a handful of these weasels won’t talk doesn’t mean that none of them will. The press needs to press them, like they used to and like a few of them still do.
But, again, that would be an interview that Christie agreed to; if that was on the Sunday news programs yesterday, then given the fact that the classified documents are the biggest topic in U.S. politics right now, Christie undoubtedly agreed to the interview, knowing full well that that was going to be something he would be asked about – and he was willing to say something.
Also, Christie is not currently an office-holder, nor is he currently running for office, and he has apparently been distancing himself from Trump since the January 6th attack.
As I noted upthread, when most Trump-supporting politicians are “confronted,” and ask for an opinion on something like this, it’s either (a) not in a formal interview setting (i.e., they get questioned while they are walking to or from a meeting, etc.), or (b) they still seem happy to stonewall or gish-gallop.
So, as described in this WaPo opinion piece, Stephanopoulos also had Republican senator Roy Blunt on his show yesterday. Blunt is retiring (so he no longer has any need to impress his voters), but he is still firmly in the “support Trump” camp. His defenses of Trump included:
tl;dr If a Trump-supporting GOP politician is intent on sticking to the party line, even a skilled journalist asking tough questions isn’t getting them to crack at this point.
Just saying that I’m certainly not the only one asking the question and hoping the press will do its job by pressing some of these politicians. I suppose the UK has some different laws, but listen to them interview their politicians and be amazed at how forcefully and directly they question those in power. It’s time for our media members to do their jobs. Here’s an article asking the question and providing some actual suggestions. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/10/03/media-fails-trump-republicans-mcconnell/
But, again:
And, in the current political environment in the U.S., in which many conservative voters have zero trust in the “mainstream media,” if they see a politician whom they support either (a) refusing to participate in interviews with the “liberal media,” or (b) refusing to answer what they see as “gotcha” questions…they’re going to see that behavior as a feature, not a bug.
Having access to the candidates increases viewership, which increases advert revenue. There are far too many media outlets willing to let candidates run wild at the mouth for there to be any threat in a “Answer the question honestly or you don’t get to be on the air” scenario.
…and, this is the mechanism for being able to lie with impunity.