DarkViperAU · @DarkViperAU
15th Nov 2016 from TwitLonger
3 minutes
Criticisms:
Paul equivocated the bias in the media and bias in election. The media was clearly biased, they have ever right to be so as they are private organization. They are not public institutions.
When talking about a 'rigged' election, that Trump won demonstrates this not to be the case. Clearly it either wasn't rigged or it was not rigged sufficiently.
Speaking to his claims of voter fraud, there has never been a study of voter fraud that has found it to have a sufficient impact on American elections. The reason for this is large that voter fraud varies in how easy it is to pull of from state to state but the logistics of it are simply impractical. Could you imagine moving thousands of people, via buses, from multiple polling places, without anyone noticing or any of those involved selling the story to Fox or Briet Bart? This is what would be required to impact the results in just ONE state, let alone 50. There are lines at polling places and the people you bus in themselves would create lines, it just isn't realistically possible. What I believe most of the Clinton people on the ground did was vote in the primaries multiple times. When they moved from state to state for their activities, they voted whenever an election came out despite not living in that state. This would not impact the elections to any great degree. The mechanism used by the elites to control elections are voter suppression and gerrymandering, they are not relocating thousands on the ground.
Paul equivocates Trumps calling the election system rigged, and the democrats calling the system of gaining advancement in social class rigged. He is wrong to do so. In American society, the social class you are born into is overwhelmingly likely to be the social class you die in. This is what the democrats are meaning when they say the system is 'rigged', people in America feel like they are unable to get a better lot in life due to the elites keeping everything for themselves. They are correct in this regard.
Moving to debate interrupting, let us consider the first presidential debate. Trump was interrupted by the republican moderator 41 times in the first debate, Clinton was interrupted by the moderator 9 times. However, Trump interrupted Clinton 51 times and Clinton interrupted Trump 17 times. That the moderator interrupted Clinton less could either be due to bias, she simply staying on topic and answering the questions better or the moderator noticing Trump was interrupting her to a considerable degree. None of this was addressed.
I don't find this video particularly amazing tbh.