You can't reason with the TDS patients in this comment section, no point in trying to engage with their media-created alternative reality.
Indeed. See for example-
Former President Barack Obama has said senior US Republicans are undermining democracy by going along with President Donald Trump's unsubstantiated claims of election fraud.
In an interview with CBS News, due to air on Sunday, Mr Obama said President-elect Joe Biden had "clearly won" this year's race for the White House.
And Obama is of course correct. Election fraud clearly undermines Democracy. Obama says Biden won, therefore he won.
The result was called by US media last weekend, but some counting continues.
And the BBC says Biden won, therefore he won. No need to count all those votes. Biden won, ok? But see also-
Lutfur Rahman was declared winner of the 2014 Tower Hamlets Mayoral Election some time before 2am on 24 May 2014 with a total of 37,395 first and second preference votes over John Biggs 34,143 votes.
Unlike Biden, Rahman won after all the votes were counted and his election was officially declared. Except for that court case, where evidence was presented and Rahman was un-won.
But that's the problem with modern democracy. There are rules and procedures governing elections in both the UK and US. Vote, count votes, deal with any irregularities, declare/certify votes and declare winner. The US system hasn't yet replaced it's Electoral College with an Editorial College to finally vote in Presidents. And ex-Presidents don't get to automatically declare their successor.
But such is politics. The Electoral College hasn't voted, Biden hasn't won. That's US democracy.. Or should be. Of course if Trump concedes, then that bit can be skipped(?) and eviction proceedings started. AFAIK once conceded, you can't un-concede. Although I guess it could be awkward if investigations invalidate state/county results, or recounts show irregularities and the outcome changes.
But like Rahman, Biden's won, okay? Back to the BBC-
The president's team has yet to provide any evidence to support their claims.
See? No evidence, therefore Rahman won. I mean Biden's won. This is how Democratcy should work. Don't wait for recounts or court cases, skip the collection and presentation of evidence to appropriate courts and declare the victor. This is a far quicker and efficient form of Democratcy. Never mind the evidence, just decide guilt or innocence based on feelings. Of course in the Rahman case, there was a BBC Panorama investigation questioning Rahman's activities.. But the police didn't think it worthy of investigation. The court case found differently however, after evidence was presented..
But such is politics. In this case, Biden's almost certainly won the popular vote, being ahead by around 50m votes. It would have to be a very serious & organised fraud to generate that many invalid votes. But of course it's different in the US, where the Electoral College votes matter. Like PA's 20 votes, where Biden's only ahead by 50,000... Maybe-
Law360 (November 12, 2020, 6:09 PM EST) -- A Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court judge ruled Thursday that the state's top election official lacked the authority to extend the deadline for voters to fix issues with verifying their identities and ordered ballots that were cured after the original Nov. 9 deadline to not be counted.
It's unclear how many ballots that affects, or how that will affect the media's projection for those all important 20 EC votes. I doubt it'll be 50,000 improperly cured. But that's only 1 challenge in PA, and there's a wider challenge to the validity of 'late' votes, and this ruling may affect the outcome of that case in the PA Supreme Court challenge. But that could affect potentially 90,000 'late' votes, if the state court rules that Boockvar did not have the authority to change the deadline. And-
The Democratic National Committee joined the suit, arguing that the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee lacked standing because they had failed to show that Boockvar's guidance had injured or will injure them.
Which is.. strange given if the court rules, as it has, that late 'cured' votes were invalid, then obviously that changes the count, the result, and the allocation of those 20 EC votes.
But again such is politics. Or the media. Evidence? There's no evidence. The BBC has declared this fake news. Except-
Reporting a bunch of sworn affidavits claiming irregularities in various marginal states. That stuff is generally considered evidence, even if it may not go anywhere, or change the outcome of this election. But it may show that claims of shenanigans were true, not 'fake news'.. In which case, where does that leave the MSM, who've spent much of the last week denying these allegations? Interestingly when looking for a semi-reliable source for the PA ruling, google didn't show the MSM reporting that case..
So, X-files again, or should democracy run it's course, run out any legal challenges and wait for results to be officially certified, or leave it to the MSM to decide election outcomes?