TrumpWorld logic: Lack of proof that it DIDN'T happen means absolute proof that it DID happen, right?

@hartfire -- Why should Trump care if anything he says corresponds to empirical reality or the rules of logic? Clearly, his supporters don't.

I'm not bothered so much by Trump. He is what he is. What he is has been evident for decades. What bothers me is the length his supporters will go to IGNORE his obvious flaws. For some reason, it's not enough for them to say, "Trump's a lousy candidate, but I still preferred him to HRC." No, somehow they have to invent an idealized Trump to defend their decision to vote for him, in the face of overwhelming evidence (such as this latest Twitter storm) of who he really is.

What's up with that?

I think it's denial, similar to what happens in the families of alcoholics when all members conspire to protect the one that is causing most of the harm.
It's a misguided idea that to ensure success, loyalty must take precedence over ethics no matter what.
Unfortunately, loyalty for its own sake, irrespective of trustworthiness, is a remarkably common value.

A great deal of human...um, silliness (and, unfortunately, evil) can be explained by the Darwinian reality that, for much of our existence as human beings, being loyal to our social group was FAR more important to our survival than understanding empirical reality in an accurate way. Psychologist Dan Kahan, who is a leading researcher in motivated cognition, notes that pointing out unpleasant truths (a la The Emperor's New Clothes) in an environment where everyone wants to believe the Emperor is dressed in the finest robes ever devised by man, simply leads to ostracism, loss of social station and,  (thankfully rarely nowadays) violence against the "heretic."

lol! Agreed. I almost used the Emperor's New Clothes example in my 2nd reply. 

Of course, archeologists have found lots of evidence of tribal warfare in paleolithic times, where ever population densities begin to impact on the resources available for survival. When the means of contraception, agriculture, trade, and transport were limited, warfare was about the only solution offering a chance of survival, and so tribal cohesion was essential. 

As one example, I look back to the origins of Judaism, to Abraham wandering with his tribe and finding that it was getting harder and harder to find grazing for his animals, having to fight many wars, and eventually having to split his herds and send part of the tribe away.  

But despite the fact that we now have many means to deal with the problems of over-population, cultural paradigms and values are remarkably slow to shift.
Unfortunately, obsolete reasons for misplaced loyalty lurk like viruses or genes amid the dances and wars of social intercourse. This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at November 29, 2016 8:05 PM MST

@hartfire -- It's interesting. I come at the question from a psychoogical perspective, you come at it from an archelogical perspective, and my brother has come at it from a historical perspective, and we all end up in the place.

For much of humanity, loyalty to in-group was and is more important than empirical correctness (e.g. No, the Iraqis DIDN'T have anything to do with the 9/11 attacks) or treating all people, including outgroups, with fairness and reciprocity (e.g. We shouldn't invade Iraq because it had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks).

He is used to make sales pitches. It is the one thing he knows. Doesn't matter if the product doesn't exist (like his university) or not. He will deliver his pitch. His pitch isn't aimed for everyone, but those who are willing to follow his dream of wealth (turns out to be his wealth each time, just like with the university... seems not like one "student" made a fortune taking part in his university... I guess we would have been presented with endorsements if so).

His voters all dream of a great America (whatever that will be, he hasn't really presented anything but a few headings). They dream of blue-collar jobs taken "back" from China. They dream of immigrants (visualised as Mexicans and Muslims) deported. They dream of boarders closed, of isolation (I am not sure where they believe greatness will come from if they don't have business internationally... irony is, Trump needs international business not to lose his investments). They dream of second amendment although people are being killed each day, and the weapons are used for domestic terrorirsm. They dream about turning the time back (no same sex marriages, no pro-choice, conservative dominated SCOTUS), maybe all the way back to McCarthy.. before the internet which in itself is ironical as the internet (and twitter) has been used as primary voice of all lies to promote Trumps sales pitch for all those who looked for a dream more than reality. Hmm.

@SH -- I guess if you WANT to believe badly enough, you'll ignore reality because reality is super depressing.

Having been Gibb-slapped by Reality many times in my life (and survived), I don't quite understand people who are so desperate to avoid it.

History should be enough, but like with kids they have to experience on their own body and not take advantage of the experiences already made and at hand. Sighs.

Actually, my answer was related. He asked about conspiracy logic, which holds that the lack of evidence is proof of a conspiracy. This is the exact motivation behind Jill Stein, Clinton, and all the nonsense about recounts.

Whatever. Keep digging. Ciao.

@StuB -- Your answer has next to nothing to do with the question. Stein called for a recount using existing procedures as is her legal right under the election laws of the respective states. I read today Stein's camp missed the Pennsylvania recount request deadline, so her recount request will not be fulfilled (maybe others can confirm that report).

Whatever the case may be, I cannot speak to Stein's motives. They may be desperate to stop Trump from being seleted by the Electroral College. It may simply be a publicity stunt.

Whatever the case may be, asking the vote count be verified is NOT an abuse of logic in the way Trump's nonsensical statement "Where's the proof Trump DIDN'T suffer from massive voter fraud?"

I suggest you revisit the Green Party challege to the electronic voting, particularly in Wisconsin. The facts on the ground we DO have are:

1) Russian hackers DID interfere in the US election process by stealing HRC e-mails and spreading fake news

2) Russian hackers DID hack voting machines in the Ukraine in 2014

3) Wisconsin uses a kind of computerized voting machine the State of California REFUSED to use because of its vulnerability to hacking

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/green-recount-effort-poised-explore-whether-russia-hacked-vote-trump

While it may end up an investigation turns up no evidence of problems, ASKING for an investigation is a very different thing from asserting a lack of proof it DIDN'T happen is evidence it DID happen.

That's right up there with my 85-year-old demented Mom who believes, in all seriousness, that if she does not PERSONALLY remember an event transpiring a particular way, that's proof it DID NOT happen that way, regardless of others' eyewitness testimony or physical evidence.

But why is Stein suddenly so concerned now about Clinton winning when she contributed so much to her defeat? Makes no sense.

Not what the OP was asking about, just like they told you in their reply for you above. you should make a question about this if it interests you to get the input from the muggers on this. :-)

It's all part of a conversation. Try not to let it bother you.

Oh, I'm not bothered, I just can not seeing how a monologue can be taken as a conversation, you know?

The OP did tell you already what they had to say about the peripher subject you added inside your reply for the question raised by the OP.

But never mind, keep up with your agenda. Have a nice one.

"Peripher subject"? Sorry if I didn't kowtow to OP's "rules" - actually I believe you meant OS.

OS will be the OP.

"what PROOF do u have DonaldTrump did not suffer from millions of FRAUD votes? Journalist? Do your job!"

What proof do you have Scarlett Johannson DIDN'T teleport to my apartment last night and give me a night of sweet sweet loving before teleporting back to her own home?

I rest my case.