Is there a way to pose this for discussion without getting alerted?

[LAS14]

I'm a believer in compromise. I look for opportunities to find common ground. I believe that if our polarization hardens much more it could be fatal. So when I find these little opportunities I yearn to talk about them with DUers. But I get alerted for pushing right wing talking points.

Is there a way to talk about this question?

We're told repeatedly that a large proportion of people who support the "election was stolen" theory actually really believe it. Why they believe this is irrelevant for the discussion I'm proposing.

We're warned about the right-wingers who are swarming to get elected/appointed to election offices.

Question. Is it possible that some of the people aiming for or achieving these positions may, in the end, not do anything to throw an election, but may just do the job and insure that it is honest?

If that is the case, then is it possible for us to give the benefit of the doubt to individuals who are aiming for or acquire these jobs?

[secondwind]

1. There is a nice bridge in Brooklyn for sale, I hear.

No. Not in this climate.

[HAB911]

2. No

They are the true believers

[Thomas Hurt]

3. Both the "election was stolen" and the "election security" issues are bee ess.

The christofascists all know the former is a lie and the latter is propaganda campaign to impugn the election process, intimidate election workers, county clerks, and exclude as many voters as possible.

IMHO any trump cultist who runs for an election office is doing so to fix the future election. They have already drank the koolaid.

It is another thing entirely whether once they are in those positions they can actually sabotage an election or survive being indicted or sued if they attempt to do so.

[Elessar Zappa]

4. I'd like to believe that but

from what I can tell, the people taking these positions are hardened partisans. I’d love to be proven wrong though.

[LeftInTX]

16. Agree

[brush]

5. What are you advocating, that wingers believe Dems stole the election...

be given the benefit of the doubt and be elected or appointed to political office or political jobs?

Just a reminder, this is pro-Democratic Party discussion board. And it's also worth noting that the republican party, taken over by extreme right wingers, is no longer a small "d" participant in American democracy, it's a trumpist political cult.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

6. I would love to believe that,

but their actions and words tell a different story.

[Earth-shine]

7. Remember when they said that Trump would rise to meet the job after being elected? nt

[lunatica]

37. The Pivot theory

Any minute now, then you’ll see!

[Hoyt]

8. Yes, it's quite possible "they" won't throw an election. They didn't in 2020. Supreme Court stood

up as did local election officials.

But, what's the interest in posting something positive.

PS: Post anything contrary to group-think and you will get an alert. Hopefully, the jury will also carry out their duties fairly. I don't know why people feel an Alert is necessary when you can post your disagreement in the little white boxes right under it.

[inthewind21]

14. Anything is possible

Question is, is it probable. No, it's not. Given what we have witnessed for over a year now. If a dog bites me, first time I give the benefit of the doubt. If it bites me again. I have enough sense to learn, don't trust the dog and keep the dog isolated. Same applies with this situation. How many times are you willing to be bit to continue to give the benefit of the doubt? My dad said to me frequently as a kid, once is a mistake, twice means you didn't learn from the first mistake but three times, well that's just plain stupidity.

[Hoyt]

15. I'm voting, and I bet courts uphold results, assuming they even have to step in.

[LAS14]

33. Actually, the question is really not "Is it probable?" Of course it's not probable.

But if it's possible, shouldn't we try to avoid thinking only in terms of the faceless "GOP," and be open to individual differences if we come in contact with individuals? If it were "probable," there would be no problem.

[Caliman73]

36. I think that there is a problem with the term "probable"

If you had cancer, that was 99% improbable to be cured with the only intervention which was a painful operation that had as much chance of killing you than helping BUT it was 1% probable so in effect POSSIBLE, would you order that operation for you 90 year old grandmother?

[RobinA]

9. The Guy

who is taking the place of the much maligned (by Republicans), much praised (by sane people) Al Schmidt in Philadelphia is the next in command to Schmidt. He seems to have the same approach as Schmidt did. I believe that is an appointed position and if so he is being appointed by a Democratic mayor. He will have the institutional knowledge of Schmidt.

[obamanut2012]

10. No

[inthewind21]

11. The time

to give the benefit of the doubt with ANYONE associated with the MAGAS is long since past. Answer this question, how many times would your neighbor/boss/friend down the street, etc. have to screw you or others over and wreak havoc, then claim he/she was just doing what was best before you no longer gave him/her the benefit of the doubt? There's your answer

[grumpyduck]

12. You are welcome to give

the benefit of the doubt to anyone you want, but trying to have a discussion about it here will more than likely be pointless.

[cbabe]

13. No. Not until they are at least ten+ years in cult recovery.

[Mad_Machine76]

17. I'm not inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt

that being said, I'm much less apocalyptic than some here about their ability to outright steal elections without people noticing and there being a massive outcry- even if they think they have laws that sanction it.

I have a feeling that most Trumpers and other assorted miscreants taking on these positions will not be able to maintain their positions for very long simply because they're bound to show their a**es pretty quick JMHO

[NewHendoLib]

18. You can't reason with a cult

[48656c6c6f20]

19. Try having a discussion

With a nest of vipers. Use your logic and intellect to lay out some good arguments. Then get back to us and tell us how it went. If it goes well I might be open to it your idea.

[hunter]

20. If the Christian Fascists were ethical people the Trump appointed Supreme Court Justices...

... would resign in shame.

White authoritarian anti-intellectual Christianity is the most dangerous political force in the U.S.A..

Tolerating these "conservative" Christians is a grave mistake. They want it all.

Their racism, misogyny, persecution of LGBT people, perjury, and disrespect of Democratic institutions should never be tolerated.

[onecaliberal]

21. 30 Republican led states have passed laws allowing them to throw out ALL votes and pick the winner.

I hear what you’re saying but when only 1 side is interested it’s not going to work out. Frankly I’m tired of people acting like republicans are working in good faith with anything. They’re lying and rigging the game right now.

[Ron Green]

22. I find myself distrustful of the institutions of this country.

The direction of our government and even our American “culture” of the past 40 years or more has been towards where we are now: Wealth inequality, environmental degradation, unhealthy bodies and minds, and a general disconnection from each other and from a shared past and future.

The hatred of Democrats by the people who would try to “take back” the electoral process is based in part on a fear that our country’s decline is tied to the bureaucratic growth that has presided over the trends listed above. It seems to me this fear, stoked by the billionaires, is just a different interpretation of my own mistrust of today’s politicians of both parties.

There must be a way to move forward beyond just attacking Republicans.

[RussBLib]

23. possible but unlikely

if any of them talk about fixing what Trump broke, then maybe, but we know lying is a stubborn habit among GOPers.

[taxi]

24. Is it possible to give the benefit of the doubt to

individuals wanting to reelect persons espousing insurrection, tyranny, and fraud you ask?
No. And not for those reasons alone. Some of those arrested for January 6th did not vote. A line cannot be drawn between the voters and non voters, the participants and supporters. It applies more so to both the active and the passive threats they pose to the Democratic party. Looking no further than the following a recent reality TV character had and picturing the signs, hand painted shirts, and foul gestures overrides any temptations, reminds me of who you are asking for.

[FakeNoose]

25. As Democrats we need to remember one thing

The Repukes KNOW that they need to cheat to win. Most of them will do anything to win, including cheating their asses off. But they also will use voter suppression, gerrymandering, SMS fakes news, and many others ways that we've discussed on DU.

If they should win their election, and in the process they've denied a Democrat the chance of winning, what if some of them (one or two anyway) grow a conscience and perform their jobs honorably? Well sure it could happen, but that's not the point. Also it's not why we're here on DU either. Our purpose on DU is to see that MORE Dems get elected - anywhere and everywhere.

So I'm sorry to say that your point is moot. Let's not go there, friend.

[bluestarone]

26. The RETHUGLICONS of today are out for ONE THING (TOTAL take over forever)

They have made their decision and i believe NOTHING will stop them. (look at the votes taking place in the House and Senate!) They are lock and key instep! MY worry is NOT the vote per say, BUT the house legislators CHANGING the system! I really believe our ONLY way to stop their big plan, is to concentrate on local AND national elections LIKE WE NEVER HAVE BEFORE! We have to come up with some type of a plan to help people get to the poles to VOTE. Every RETHUGLICON state is trying to STOP people from voting. WE know this, so we HAVE answer back SMARTLY! I don't know what would be the BEST way, BUT THIS is the key for us to win! IF we DON'T i fear they will get control of our country forever!

[BlueJac]

27. Republicans are cheaters and liars...

The crazies running for office will do the same or worse. I have seen enough, they only care about obtaining power!

[Hugh_Lebowski]

28. Looking at the last year, the answer is clearly NO. There's NO reason to even entertain the thought

that you are proposing.

One would have to be a fool to seriously consider it, quite frankly.

[uponit7771]

29. Nearly 70 cases against them says they don't deserve the benefit of the doubt

[iemanja]

30. I see you're well meaning

but no, power means everything to the GOP.

[Paladin]

31. Not a chance.

After what trump and his goons have done to this country? No way.

[msongs]

32. here's the concept: everything the nazis did in germany was legal because they wrote the

laws and set up the system. repubs are writing the laws and setting up the system as we speak

[Caliman73]

34. None of the discussions from the right are in "good faith"

Democrats have been, for the last 50+ years, the party of government and compromise. There would certainly be a way to talk about those issues if they were being presented in good faith.

That is the problem LAS14. Republican controlled states with Republican controlled elections boards audited the elections, multiple times and found no evidence of fraud. Republicans are threatening to replace other Republicans. Why? Why would Republicans want to replace other Republicans?

I will say, yes, it is possible that some of the people looking to get into those positions to just want to do a job with integrity. The other question is, is it likely. To that I say NO, not likely at all. I guess that answers your second question. It is not at this time, possible to give the benefit of the doubt to those people. They have done nothing to earn the benefit of the doubt. The benefit of the doubt is earned through a history of actions that show integrity.

Also, you said that "Why they believe this is irrelevant for the discussion" I would disagree. Why they believe is super relevant. If they actively listen to an believe lies that are being told to them without the ability or desire to test the veracity of those lies, then an honest open discussion is not possible.

[LAS14]

35. " The other question is, is it likely." Of course it's not likely. I raise the question...

... to encourage us to deal with individuals, whom we may happen to come in contact with, with an open mind. To find out if they are one of the unlikely ones and converse with them accordingly.

[Caliman73]

38. That is not the question you posed.

You asked if it were possible that the people who are seeking to replace elections officials are possibly doing it just out of a sense of integrity.

We can talk to "lay" people about the situation. When you get to the level of delusion, where you think that you need to replace someone in government, from your own party, because they only audited a vote count 3 times and didn't find anything, then you are talking about NO possibility.

We should definitely try to have conversations where we can, with family and friends, etc... but that was not what you were posing. You gave a specific scenario and the answer to that one is that those people seeking power based on lies that they have bought into, first need to be deprogrammed from those lies in order to have ANY chance at any conversation.

[lunatica]

39. We would run the risk of

Sticking our toe into crocodile infested waters just to give the crocs the benefit of the doubt. Sure, the crocs have a different take on life, but it doesn’t include them thinking we aren’t a meal.