Yes, and it was held up by the right as an admission of election theft but the left considered a point of pride as to their cleverness. They were bragging.

Serious voters who look at the issues underestimate the large number of voters who cast votes based on things unrelated to issues. Specifically, how "nice" politicians come across does affect election outcomes. Like it or not, it's true.

If you will recall the two Trump / Biden debates, in the first debate Trump repeatedly interrupted Biden. He was insulting and his tone was argumentative. You can characterize his performance any way you want, but after the debate nobody would say "he seems like a nice guy." In the second debate, his performance was completely different. He was tough and defended his record vigorously, but he let Biden talk and came across much more polite.

There is a reason for that. Karl Rove said he knows for a fact that Trump was told to use his "tough but nice" persona. He rejected the advice in debate one. After the debate they did polling. Trump was told that he didn't help himself at all. In fact, he lost support among, in particular, moderate women. So he changed course and was a different guy in debate two. Rove said it was too late. He thinks it cost him the election. Not just the first debate, but the fact that too many voters came to the conclusion that Trump was not nice, not empathetic.

To be clear, I am not defending this. I voted for Trump twice, enthusiastically. But Rove is right that a surprising number of voters put a lot of weight on things that are not really related to issues. As an example, I recently visited a dermatologist for a minor issue that was cleared up. A neighbor was looking for a dermatologist too, so she asked me about him. She had just one question. Not was he competent, was he thorough, was he complete, did he do a good job. No. Her one question - was he nice? A lot of people make important decisions based on that.

It's sad and unfortunate, but it's true. I think a lot of people don't appreciate the extent to which the Democrats were successful in painting Trump as a "mean guy," and how much it affected the election.

And yet so many unanswered “oddities” with the election.

Things left unexplained.

Shutting down the counting because of a water main break.

Hmmm…

B.S.
Their was wide spread cheating.

Regarding Fed161's post. I wonder how many of those moderate women would hire a "nice guy" for a divorce attorney? I'm not disagreeing that he might have lost support there, just pointing out how stupid that is. And in the end I don't think that's what cost him the election. It was the people counting the ballots.

quote:

Originally posted by Fed161:
There is a reason for that. Karl Rove said he knows for a fact that Trump was told to use his "tough but nice" persona. He rejected the advice in debate one. After the debate they did polling. Trump was told that he didn't help himself at all. In fact, he lost support among, in particular, moderate women. So he changed course and was a different guy in debate two. Rove said it was too late. He thinks it cost him the election.

Karl Rove is just another swamp creature. Did his "excellent advice" ever help Bush Jr. and his administration? His advice to Bush Jr. was to play nice, don't fight back and as a result the MSM and the Dems steamrolled him for years, resulting in Zippy the Pinhead getting elected. I wouldn't trust Karl Rove to tell me the sun rises in the east every morning without independently checking it first for myself.

quote:

Originally posted by JoseyWales2:

quote:

Originally posted by Fed161:
There is a reason for that. Karl Rove said he knows for a fact that Trump was told to use his "tough but nice" persona. He rejected the advice in debate one. After the debate they did polling. Trump was told that he didn't help himself at all. In fact, he lost support among, in particular, moderate women. So he changed course and was a different guy in debate two. Rove said it was too late. He thinks it cost him the election.

Karl Rove is just another swamp creature. Did his "excellent advice" ever help Bush Jr. and his administration? His advice to Bush Jr. was to play nice, don't fight back and as a result the MSM and the Dems steamrolled him for years, resulting in Zippy the Pinhead getting elected. I wouldn't trust Karl Rove to tell me the sun rises in the east every morning without independently checking it first for myself.

I know a lot of people across the political spectrum. I did cite Rove as a source in my post, but my point about Trump's persona as a "mean guy" (and the affect it had on the election) is based mainly on my own observations. Whenever I would engage voters (including independents who I know voted for some Republicans), I would bring up issues. The conversation always ended with the statement that they could never vote for such a mean bastard. Issues were secondary. Make sense? Of course not. But it's a reality, and the polling shows that. Karl Rove may be a swamp creature, but as the saying goes, even a broken watch is right twice a day.

quote:

The conversation always ended with the statement that they could never vote for such a mean bastard. Issues were secondary.

It's a bullshit excuse. Anyone that truly believes that is a fool.

the Presidency wasn't supposed to be a popularity contest, its supposed to be what is best for the country

but even going back to John Adams, its seldom been about what is good for the country

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:

quote:

The conversation always ended with the statement that they could never vote for such a mean bastard. Issues were secondary.

It's a bullshit excuse. Anyone that truly believes that is a fool.

Yes. I agree completely. Who believes that the American electorate is filled with geniuses? I don't.

So I can talk a nice lie, and get elected.

It’s a well-established fact that some people will vote or not vote for someone based solely on his/her appearance. Members here sometimes have to be warned about the juvenile practice of commenting about how someone in the news looks. And if people vote or don’t vote for someone because of how he looks, we can be certain that people will not vote for someone just because of his apparent personality regardless of the issues involved. It’s a sad fact, but it is a fact nevertheless—and one that has profound effects.

quote:

Originally posted by Hamden106:
So I can talk a nice lie, and get elected.

441 do it every 2 years, 2 every 4, and 100 every 6, so it obviously works.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
It’s a well-established fact that some people will vote or not vote for someone based solely on his/her appearance. Members here sometimes have to be warned about the juvenile practice of commenting about how someone in the news looks. And if people vote or don’t vote for someone because of how he looks, we can be certain that people will not vote for someone just because of his apparent personality regardless of the issues involved. It’s a sad fact, but it is a fact nevertheless—and one that has profound effects.

The leftist press and the people that follow them and comment on articles or social media were constantly talking about Trump's appearance. His hair, his skin tone, his weight, his height, everything. They said he wasn't as tall as he claimed, or was fatter than he admitted to and wore undergarments to hold his gut in. He drank too much Diet Coke and ate too much fast food.

Like any of that has any bearing on his ability to function as President.

The public was fed a constant stream of lies about Trump by the far left media and deep state. No President in modern history has had to put up with so much bias. No First Lady in modern history had to put up with what Melania did either.

quote:

Originally posted by Pyker:

quote:

Originally posted by Hamden106:
So I can talk a nice lie, and get elected.

441 do it every 2 years, 2 every 4, and 100 every 6, so it obviously works.

441? Who are the extra 6?

flashguy

quote:

Originally posted by Pyker:

quote:

Originally posted by Hamden106:
So I can talk a nice lie, and get elected.

441 do it every 2 years, 2 every 4, and 100 every 6, so it obviously works.

98% re-election rate for incumbents. Yep, it works.

Say what the people want to hear for a few months and then go to DC and do whatever the hell you want. It's why MT was stuck with Baucus for three decades and likely Tester for the same.

quote:

441? Who are the extra 6?

1 from DC and 5 delegates from US territories. All non voting.


.

Roughly 43,000 absentee ballot counted in DeKalb County in 2020 violated chain of custody rule

https://justthenews.com/politi...licy/elections/sdfsd

More than 70% of the 61,731 absentee ballots put in drop boxes in the November 2020 presidential election in DeKalb County, Georgia, were counted and certified by officials, despite violating chain of custody requirements.

The exact number of ballots was 43,907, according to the Georgia State News. The ballots were counted and certified by county and state officials, the news outlet says.

The chain of custody requirements are set forth in Georgia Emergency Rule 183-1-14-1.8-.14, put into effect by the Georgia State Election Board in July 2020.

The rule states absentee ballots placed in drop boxes "shall be immediately transported to the county registrar" by the two-person collection team. The team is required to sign a ballot-transfer form indicating the number of ballots picked up, the time the ballots were picked up and the location of the drop box.

The rule also states the county registrar or a designee “thereof shall sign the ballot transfer form upon receipt of the ballots from the collection team."

The Georgia Star News obtained from the DeKalb County law department 725 absentee ballot dropbox transfer forms used in the election in the county to document the chain of custody of the 61,731 absentee ballots, in response to an open records request.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
It’s a well-established fact that some people will vote or not vote for someone based solely on his/her appearance. Members here sometimes have to be warned about the juvenile practice of commenting about how someone in the news looks. And if people vote or don’t vote for someone because of how he looks, we can be certain that people will not vote for someone just because of his apparent personality regardless of the issues involved. It’s a sad fact, but it is a fact nevertheless—and one that has profound effects.

And President Trump had a “give no quarter, call out the BS, never stop fighting” approach that many Americans found truly refreshing after a string of apparently spineless milquetoast excuses for Republican candidates. Unfortunately, there are apparently far too many who prefer mild and unoffensive to frank and direct. Did President Trump go farther than perhaps was necessary (or beneficial) sometimes? Probably. However, it was very apparent that his heart was in the right place and he was all about doing what was best for America. Unfortunately, far too many people either were too foolish to see that, deeply confused about what is best for America, or cared more about other things than what is best for America.

What baffles me is all these "Anti-Trumpers" come out with all these books about how bad he was, but no one is willing to write about today. There is no way Joe is calling the shots you would think someone would expose what is really going on behind closed doors.

quote:

Originally posted by redlickranch:
What baffles me is all these "Anti-Trumpers" come out with all these books about how bad he was, but no one is willing to write about today. There is no way Joe is calling the shots you would think someone would expose what is really going on behind closed doors.

American Markxism

The Authoritarian Moment: How the Left Weaponized America's Institutions Against Dissent

The Tyranny of Big Tech