Cathy Young’s (edit) article on the bothsiderism of election denial is excellent. For one thing, she starts by acknowledging there has been a bit of election denialism by the Dems. There has been, full stop.
That said, the base and pundits are purposely refusing to acknowledge that whining is different than a well-thought out and gamed attempt to methodically switch all the levers of political power to change the outcome of an election.
I’m truly hoping the bad-faith equivalency arguments are just to provide a fig-leaf cover. Because if partisans (and even everyday voters) cannot understand the difference between Stacey Abrams’ unhappiness and Donald Trump’s evil, we’re in very deep s%^t.
It's also worth pointing out the qualitative difference between Democratic election complaints and Republican.
Democrats who complain about stolen elections talk about voter suppression, gerrymandering, or anti-democratic institutions like the electoral college. The solution to these problems is to allow everyone to vote and to have everyone's vote have equal weight.
Republicans who complain about stolen elections talk about illegal ballots, vote rigging, and voter fraud. The solutions to those problems are to reduce the number of votes and disenfranchise certain groups of voters.
The democrats complaints are mostly well-founded and based on real issues. The Republican's are mostly based on lies and misinformation. But even if both were true, the Democrat's solutions are massively better than the Republicans.
Sadly, I don't think the majority of people will take the time to break things down like this and just see "both sides" and write it off.
Yes, you addressed an almost invisible elephant in the room: when a future election is actually stolen from Democrats, their cries of foul will seem fraudulent. Stacey Abrams’ loss in the Georgia gubernatorial race against the sitting Secretary of State overseeing that election, was highly suspicious. But Trump’s false stop-the-steal claims have cast doubt on legitimate claims of tampering. As intended.
Thanks; I had forgotten the details. Her response was perfectly in keeping with democracy; she voiced her concerns, then as you say, she got back to work. I’ve heard her a few times on Pod Save America, and I was impressed with her lightening quick intelligence. She’s a dynamo.
Cathy Young’s (edit) article on the bothsiderism of election denial is excellent. For one thing, she starts by acknowledging there has been a bit of election denialism by the Dems. There has been, full stop.
That said, the base and pundits are purposely refusing to acknowledge that whining is different than a well-thought out and gamed attempt to methodically switch all the levers of political power to change the outcome of an election.
I’m truly hoping the bad-faith equivalency arguments are just to provide a fig-leaf cover. Because if partisans (and even everyday voters) cannot understand the difference between Stacey Abrams’ unhappiness and Donald Trump’s evil, we’re in very deep s%^t.
It's also worth pointing out the qualitative difference between Democratic election complaints and Republican.
Democrats who complain about stolen elections talk about voter suppression, gerrymandering, or anti-democratic institutions like the electoral college. The solution to these problems is to allow everyone to vote and to have everyone's vote have equal weight.
Republicans who complain about stolen elections talk about illegal ballots, vote rigging, and voter fraud. The solutions to those problems are to reduce the number of votes and disenfranchise certain groups of voters.
The democrats complaints are mostly well-founded and based on real issues. The Republican's are mostly based on lies and misinformation. But even if both were true, the Democrat's solutions are massively better than the Republicans.
Sadly, I don't think the majority of people will take the time to break things down like this and just see "both sides" and write it off.
Agree!
That was Cathy Young's piece. But yes - the GOP is orders of magnitude worse.
Thank you! I will try to go back and edit if I can figure out how. 
Yes, you addressed an almost invisible elephant in the room: when a future election is actually stolen from Democrats, their cries of foul will seem fraudulent. Stacey Abrams’ loss in the Georgia gubernatorial race against the sitting Secretary of State overseeing that election, was highly suspicious. But Trump’s false stop-the-steal claims have cast doubt on legitimate claims of tampering. As intended.
Thanks; I had forgotten the details. Her response was perfectly in keeping with democracy; she voiced her concerns, then as you say, she got back to work. I’ve heard her a few times on Pod Save America, and I was impressed with her lightening quick intelligence. She’s a dynamo.