Has any conservative or republican found the election fraud claim unlikely or far fetched?

@sargentd: Lol, at least make your spin something that isn't blatantly false on its face.

Going by this thread it seems the answer is "no".

When is he not met with controversy?

With that said, getting triggered over a "trailer" and the usage of the word "may" is hardly something I would grab pitchforks over. The irony is missed however, for it's not "democratic" to ask questions... Accept it or we will demonize you.

The funny thing is that when this whole thing started tucker Carlson actually was complaining there was no evidence of election fraud.

He was heavily critized by his own viewers for doing so and then completely changed his approach.

Now he doesn't care about lack of proof, he is just concerned about "how many people have doubts about the election and that needs to be satisfied"

He even made an entire show about a dead person voting. He then had to retract publically when the old lady appeared on tv claiming, very convincingly, that she was alive.

Alive voter

https://youtu.be/mlECoataVLU

First reaction of tucker Carlson to election fraud: ask for evidence

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-rudy-giuliani-sidney-powell-election-fraud.amp

His viewers did not accept this.

@Stevo_the_gamer: i definitely do not think all of us demonize people.

But i dont see any logic to it. I think anyone not emotionally involved, would look at the circumstances and conclude that fraud claims are extremely unlikely.

There is a desire to believe them, because people have been pumping themselves up so much and investing themselves emotionally so much in to the trump campaign that the idea of loosing, specially against biden is unacceptable.

For some people the campaign became their identity.

But,You can see the most logical of the crowd like ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson publically stating they consider fraud claims to be false.

Some people are realizing.

Jordan Peterson on election fraud

https://youtu.be/YKUcTbtMT9k

Ben Shapiro on election fraud

https://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/Op-Ed/2021/01/16/Ben-Shapiro-The-lies-tearing-America-apart/stories/202101160006

Indeed it's silly to be triggered over this Tucker gas lighting at this point. We know his fictional schticks.

It's better to simply fact check it with no emotion, or laughter at the very least. Which many reliable sources will do, and I'll probably post a fact check thread about it after his fictional piece airs and is quickly dismantled.

Sometimes good ol' fashioned satire/teasing of ridiculous arguments can be the most entertaining way to handle extremism.

Yeah but dismissing them isn't always wise either. Extremism can lead to actions.

Oh? What is your solution for the internet vitriol?

He's attempting to re-write history. He doesn't need to explicitly state 'This happened'. You only need to plant the seed of doubt and these mouth breathing MAGA folk with eat it up. But keep on brushing this stuff aside like it's nothing. Seems like you're OK with perpetuating conspiracies. Shame.

Alex Jones was 'just asking questions' about Sandy Hook too I suppose. "Accept it or we will demonize you".....a perfect line for some flat Earther or some other conspiracy nut. When faced with a reality that doesn't fit their world view, bereft of evidence to support their stance, they default to crying persecution.

Lol. A political commentator posting content to a subscription based video streaming service is... "rewriting history" based on a trailer and the mention of a third person stating "may"?

And yes, this will definitely be the catalyst to plant seed of doubt in people who espouse to "MAGA" mantra and already subscribe to Fox Nation.

Okay with perpetuating conspiracies? Lmao. Pretty much, especially when I watched an alien documentary on a streaming service, I was also approving those conspiracies too! #we'renotalone #etphonehome

Like clock work. Pretty much what I expected.

As I said, you're just perpetuating these things by brushing them aside. Tucker isn't fringe. He's the largest watched political commentator at the moment. People believe what he says, they like what he says. Those of us who know how these things work can see the danger in things like this.

Sorry, my pitchfork is in the shop right now for maintenance (needed a new pole). Perhaps when it's back in service, I can reach out against impropriety found on video streaming services. #badnewsbears

Shoot, my virtue signaling attachment is also not charged. I guess my Dave Chappelle righteousness I planned for today must wait for another day! #inthistogether #comingforyoutucker

Where did I mention the internet?

Who is "them" to you?

Extremists.

What is your solution for said "extremists"?

Exactly what I said. Don't ignore them. Keep them on the radar.

What does that mean though?

*Shrugs* keep doing you. There's a reason that a large portion of GOP voters are deluding themselves into 'The Big Lie'. Mock it all you want but the Republican party is openly dabbling in conspiracies now. Scary and embarrassing if you ask me.

@HoolaHoopMan: to be honest, even though I don't like tucker, if he was saying, as he did before, that election fraud claims are not backed by evidence, his own viewers would eat him alive. This has happened already.

So yes, part is his fault, but part is his viewers really really really don't want to be told evidence is needed for this claims to be valid.

He shouldn't lie period.

Yes, but lying is very common and its not only conservatives that lie.

This is just more egregious.

@Stevo_the_gamer: Watch them, dont pretend they dont exist.

How do you watch them?

I'm guessing you're asking people who aren't big fans of the 4th amendment.

What’s wrong with demonizing people who hold beliefs that stand contrary (and chronically resistant) to all available evidence? They should be demonized, ridiculed and mocked. Mercilessly, continuously, and with no apologies given for it.

There‘s not a thing admirable about these folks (such as those still denying the 2020 election). They aren’t intellectually curious. They’re not exercising healthy skepticism driven by genuine interest to discover the truth. They‘re not independent in their thought process. They're not patriots. They’re nothing but people who are a) so adamantly beholdened to a belief that they exist in willful ignorance and delusion, or b) they deep down damn well know better, know the truth, and don’t care because (due to toxic partisanship or ideology), it’s simply a means to an end.

Why should they be treated with any degree of respect or kid gloves?

At this point, these imbeciles are no better than flat earthers, masquerading and pushing their delusions under the guise of patriotism, individualism, contrarianism, and then crying persecution and playing the victim when they’re held to their delus….err “convictions”. They should be nothing but demonized as long as they insist on adhering to a reality they desperately want to exist instead of the one that actually does, especially when it’s a delusion that targets and denigrates the pillar of our democracy.

@MirkoS77: its simple. A democracy can't work by excluding 30% of the population. Specially if it turns violent.

And you do little convincing by mercilessly ridiculing and mocking. You only make people push back harder.

And worse, it becomes an instrument for emotional satisfaction through punishment of others. So it leads yourself away from constructively expressing your point of views.

Instead of trying to argue your point (which makes you further analyze it as you express it ), your focus becomes about humiliating the other person.

@nirgal: Rethink that statement, then read what others on the right say.

@thenation: i have thought it through. You just never notice or remember the least extreme people because all humans have a tendency to focus on the negative.

I am myself right wing leaning in my own country and i do not consider myself to be an extremist.

But opinions like mine will never garner as much attention as conspiracy theories do or other extreme ideas do.

It's an incredible balance though weighing individual liberty to security. Jefferson quote comes to mind there. For example, I have fake social media accounts that I use to investigate a variety of crimes relating to street racing, tagging, gang involvement, weapon possession, drug sales, stolen property, sex trafficking, etc. Said fake accounts can be used to develop probable cause to get a warrant for their social media account data (including location and device data). I can then get a 90 day delay order so they don't even know I went through their most personal data until the warrant is already activated and they're in custody.

Criminality is rather black and white thanks to the penal code where as "extremism" has many shades of gray. Gray which requires interpretation. Interpretation through the lens of the beholder. When does "extreme" place you on a watchlist? What sort of "watchlist" does that even entail? How far does it go?

The Federal government and their surveillance programs are fascinating and equally terrifying.

@Stevo_the_gamer: Isn't that entrapment?

No, monitoring social media postings is not entrapment.

Ah I thought you were interacting with them. And with that you answered how to keep an eye on extremists.

I'm taking about the internet, you said you weren't.

I'm talking in general. Monitoring threats. That WAS done pre internet.

@LJS9502_basic: Again, how do you keep them on the radar then? What does that even mean?

@Stevo_the_gamer: maybe he thinks we should have the FBI tapping their phones and internet, you know for the "others"

How were threats watched pre internet?

And what determines if someone is enough of a threat to warrant monitoring?

I wasn't talking to you. I was talking to the law enforcement individual that does just that.

I find it telling they are trying to make you out to be some sort of nazi looking to get conservatives. Funnier is that the nazi were conservatives looking to get the left.

You tell me, if that's what you're suggesting.

I'm not signaling out internet as a tool but in the past law enforcement has kept tabs on people on their radar for various crimes.