Is This a Joke? Washington Post Writer Wonders if the GOP can Accept Election Results They Don't Like

|
|
Posted: Nov 09, 2019 1:11 AM
Is This a Joke? Washington Post Writer Wonders if the GOP can Accept Election Results They Don't Like

Source: Matthew Hinton/The Advocate via AP

Yes, the featured image is that of an anti-Trump protest after the 2016 election. Liberals went nuts in the streets. Protests, setting things on fire, and yelling into the clouds—it’s typical behavior from these people who think they’re entitled to win every election. Sorry, real America punched you in the mouth. Since 2016, there have been other Democrats who have simply refused to concede their election losses. Stacey Abrams in Georgia is a prime example, where she thinks voter suppression is what caused her to lose. It had nothing to do with her 50,000+-vote deficit to Republican Gov. Brian Kemp. And she to this day hasn’t conceded. In fact, she has declared that Democrats don’t have to concede elections anymore for reasons that are just too stupid to air out. You can read for it yourself. There’s only so much ‘woke’ nonsense that I can take. I bring this up because The Washington Post ran a piece questioning if the GOP can ever accept election results they don’t like after the 2019 elections:

One occasionally hears liberals muse that even if Trump were to lose next year, he might simply refuse to vacate the White House. This seems a highly unlikely scenario, especially since there may be nothing Trump fears more than public humiliation. Instead, what is far more likely is that Trump would not have to be physically removed from the Oval Office, but would — starting immediately after Election Day and continuing into his post-presidential life — undertake a campaign to discredit the results.

[…]

The most important question is: If he’s back at Mar-a-Lago furiously tweeting about how much he was wronged, will anyone care? Or will he succeed in leading his voters to refuse to accept that the election was proper simply because they didn’t like it?

Some of those supporters certainly won’t accept it. They’ve been trained by Trump and other Republicans over and over to reject anything that challenges their faith in Trump’s godlike perfection. Newspaper reports behind-the-scenes chaos in the White House? It’s “fake news.” Poll says Trump’s approval rating is down? They just made the numbers up. As Trump told supporters last July, “Just remember, what you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.” They’ve had years of practice constructing a mental world made up only of “facts” that support their existing views.

[…]

…perhaps the most important factor will be how Republican officeholders react. Will they distance themselves from the defeated Trump, or will they continue to quake in fear of his supporters? After four years of doing the latter, do they remember how to do anything else?

If those Republicans send a message that the election’s outcome was unfortunate but not cause for a revolution, things could calm down quickly. But I fear they may not have it in them, that the way they tried to delegitimize Barack Obama will be not half as bad as what they have in store for the next Democratic president. Trump might not have the attention span to lead a revolution, but Republicans know how to spend years sabotaging a president. As depressing as it is to say, that might be the best outcome we can hope for.

Okay—what the hell is this? The operative word in the headline is “relearn.” Relearning how to accept political outcomes that Republicans don’t like. We never had that issue. Again, this is an issue that’s exclusive to liberal America, which has resisted Trump in all aspects of socio-political life. In government, there is an anti-Trump deep state that runs through some of the most prominent institutions in the country, from the Department of Justice to the secretive intelligence community. The author uses Matt Bevin’s probable election defeat in his gubernatorial re-election bid in Kentucky as some harbinger of what could come if Trump loses in 2020. First, as of now, Trump won’t lose. Second, the author admits Bevin has every right to contest the results, which are razor-thin. 

“To be clear, Bevin is perfectly within his rights to hold off on a concession; eventually he’ll have to either prove that something went seriously wrong or give up.” Oh, and then references Stacey Abrams’s post-2018 antics. This is Trump Derangement Syndrome. There is no proof that Trump won’t concede, and those who think he won’t have yet to catch the appallingly sarcastic tone that’s inherent in the delivery of the remark. Trump knows if he says this, the liberal media will go nuts. And without fail these morons prove him right.