heybruce

As has been demonstrated, some people will read the source you provided.

So one riot and no court challenges.

Really? Can you name a stable, successful democracy in which election results are not accepted by the losers?

When were the results of the 2016 election challenged in court, and by who? Also, when and where were there riots, looting and arson over the 2016 results?

That 80% include people who believe Trump's big lie and those who were shaken by how close Trump came to preventing the certification of the election result by riling up a mob and sending it to the Capitol.

Yes. I believe Mueller and his report. "The report also found that the Russian government, which is led by President Vladimir Putin, interfered with the 2016 presidential election "in sweeping and systematic fashion." Mueller reinforced that on Wednesday. "There were multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election. And that allegation deserves the attention of every American." " https://www.cnet.com/news/politics/robert-mueller-on-trump-and-russian-interference-the-report-speaks-for-itself/

Clearly that is not true, as most people who read the article will see. I think we can see why you believe the election is stolen; if the facts don't agree with what you want to believe, you redefine the facts.

"the system", not the election. The January 6 assault on the Capitol shook up Americans confidence in the system. Two sentences further you can read "30% say they are very confident in the U.S. election systems overall." If you go to the link provided you will see a discussion of the poll results which state: "Sixty-five percent of Americans believe Biden's victory in the 2020 election was legitimate, which is similar to the results of a January 2021 ABC News/Ipsos poll (68%). Nearly all Democrats -- 93% -- think the election results were legitimate while most Republicans do not. Among Republicans, 71% sided with Trump's false claims that he was the rightful winner." https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/majority-americans-jan-attack-threatened-democracy-poll/story?id=81990555

You should read your references. It doesn't say that.

I don't believe the election was stolen for the same reason I don't believe in the Easter bunny; I have not seen convincing evidence of either. If you have convincing evidence of either, please share it.

Good. Let's take the next step. Do you agree that democracy can't exist unless losing candidates concede that they lost unless they have verifiable evidence of significant fraud in the election?

I know that neither has ever existed in pure form in any society and never will. I know that the "ideals" of all extremes have an appealing simplicity but don't work in the real world.

Did Hillary Clinton ever challenge the vote count or try to stop Trump's certification as President? Regarding Trump and the media, he was gifted the Republican nomination in 2016 by the news channels that gave him incalculable amounts of free publicity in their pursuit of ratings. The Democrat's "assault" on Trump was similar by McConnell's vow to make Obama a one term President and nothing compared to Trump's promotion of the birtherism nonsense.

If Trump would acknowledge that the election was fair and the results legitimate and he would stop undermining democracy it would please me tremendously. I don't think that's going to happen. Do you?

Here's two things I can pin on him: Trump did not call off the rioters in the Capitol until after it was clear they would not succeed in preventing the certification of the election. Trump will not concede he lost the election, in spite of having no evidence of election fraud on a scale anywhere near large enough to change the outcome. Democracy can not work unless losing candidates accept election results.

Trump didn't even acknowledge his supporters were in the Capitol until more than two hours after the attack began, and he didn't ask them to leave until after it was clear they would not prevent the election certification.

Same to you.

In neither of those tweets does Trump ask his supporters to leave the Capitol. In the 4:17 video Trump praises the rioters but tells them to go home, and he again promotes the stolen election lie. Not the clear and decisive direction that was needed. His "stand back and stand by" direction to the Proud Boys was clearer than those tame tweets and video. The Capitol was breached around 2 p.m. Pence was evacuated at 2:26 and the House went into recess due to the breach at 2:30.

Sure. The point you keep trying to divert away from. The point that Trump could have stopped the attack on the Capitol with a single tweet but chose not to do so. Thank you for allowing me to make it again.

That's a weird request. What does economics have to do with my post and why do you want me to study it?

And Trump's defenders divert away from it rather than address it every time. Thanks for helping me make the point.

It has everything to do with defending democracy. Democracy can not exist in a society where losing candidates refuse to accept election results. Trump has no business holding office in any democratic society.

Most of the discussion of this topic is taking place here: https://aseannow.com/topic/1266826-trump-booed-at-arizona-rally-over-his-new-endorsement/page/13/#comment-17515904 If moderators succeed in redirecting it here, be ready for the latest diversion from the Trump defenders: "But Trump said a few nice words during his incendiary speech promoting the stolen election lie, and he tweeted a carefully worded statement complementing his followers but asking them to leave the Capitol after it was clear the attempt to stop certification of the election had failed." It's understandable that they would avoid addressing the actual topic here, there is no way to make Trump look good.

Please be honest. When it was clear the protest had degenerated into a violent attack on the Capitol, what did Trump do? Answer: He watched it on television. Even though tweeting seems to be his favorite activity, he didn't send a tweet that could have stopped the attack. Neither his few nice words during an otherwise incendiary speech promoting stolen election lies or his tweets after the fact to try and cover his inaction make up for the fact that he could have stopped the attack with a tweet and he did nothing.

You have confirmed my original post: Some people consider those who defend democracy to be leftists. Give us all a good laugh. What do you consider to be a centrist?