There is plenty of evidence that Russia interfered in the 2016 election, to the point where it's impossible to say they did not with a straight face. Just because it wasn't directly "hacked" doesn't mean there was not overwhelming evidence of interference. But in the end, very few people considered that election "stolen".
How many democrats voted against certifying election results compared to 2020. How much news time was dedicated to discussing these claims. How many court cases occurred because of them. How many people attacked government buildings?
Did the Democrats attempt to send a second set of electors?
Did any Democrat state party make false claims of election fraud part of their platform?
"We reject the certified results of the 2020 Presidential election, and we hold that acting President Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. was not legitimately elected by the people of the United States,"
Q:How many democrats voted against certifying 2016?
7. https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-democrats-object-mor.... How much news time? 4 years. How many court cases? 1 impeachment and countless other cases. Attacked government buildings? Plenty of democrats on video using the "stolen election" to agitate far left violence. Regardless, talk about "whataboutism". My point isn't to justify every claim and response from every republican. It's to point out there is actually evidence of fraud in 2020. To say there was none is intellectually dishonest.
Q:Did the Democrats attempt to send a second set of electors?
A:Yes, and were successful in some cases: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_electors_in_the_2016... But again, irrelevant to my point. Again, I'm not saying all republican responses to actual and perceived fraud are correct. Just that fraud did happen. How best to rectify is another question completely.
Q: Did any democrat state party make false claims of election fraud part of their platform.
A: Neither did republicans. They made true claims of election fraud part of their platform. Even if you disagree that the code above is accurate or the video is showing fraud, there are tons of democrats - including Hillary - urging the same for 2016 with the main evidence being a few facebook ads from russia.
" They made true claims of election fraud part of their platform. "
What claims of substantial fraud in multiple states have been proven? The statement below is from the source document. This is an official republican party document.
"We believe that substantial election fraud in key metropolitan areas significantly affected the results in five key states in favor of Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. We reject the certified results of the 2020 Presidential election, and we hold that acting President Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. was not legitimately elected by the people of the United States. We strongly urge all Republicans to work to ensure election integrity and to show up to vote in November of 2022, bring your friends and family, volunteer for your local Republicans, and overwhelm any possible fraud."
Okay, now let's continue to answer the question you were actually asked: “How many democrats voted against certifying election results compared to 2020”.
To summarize: 7 House Democrats objected, never more than one per state and not a single senator supported this. Quoting the same article:
> Because no senators signed onto the objections made by House Democrats in 2017, then-Vice President Biden by law denied all of the objections, repeatedly saying "there is no debate."
Now, let's talk 2020:
* 6 senators and 121 members of the House objected to Arizona's outcome
* 7 senators and 138 members of the House objected to Pennsylvania's
That's far more significant than a single person making a stunt protest, especially since it includes a number of people in what has traditionally been the more conservative chamber (finding a single crazy vote in the House has historically not been a challenge), and it's worth noting that those numbers widely accepted to be lower than expected prior to the January 6th attack on the Capitol – those were predicted at 14 senators so still nowhere near a majority but a large enough number to believe these beliefs were shared by a sizable fraction of the party if they got ⅓ of the GOP senators and ⅔ of the GOP reps to sign onto baseless accusations at a time when even Trump's own campaign was telling him he lost fair and square.
What's even more telling has been what happened afterwards, as the few Republicans willing to publicly stand up for objective reality keep getting purged from the party.
There is nothing remotely on that on the Democratic side: Hillary Clinton conceded the election immediately, and there's no sizable fraction of the party leadership claiming that the election wasn't accurately counted. There was considerable talk about foreign influence or voter suppression but there's nothing like the equivalent of election officials receiving threats because they performed their duties with integrity.
You're leaving out the key part that a) most of these were Democrats chasing not to vote for Clinton and b) they were protest votes for third-parties, not flipping to the opposition as the Trump team was hoping to do in 2020:
> As a result of the seven successfully cast faithless votes, the Democratic Party nominee, Hillary Clinton, lost five of her pledged electors while the Republican Party nominee and then president-elect, Donald Trump, lost two. Three of the faithless electors voted for Colin Powell while John Kasich, Ron Paul, Bernie Sanders, and Faith Spotted Eagle each received one vote.
> Even if you disagree that the code above is accurate or the video is showing fraud, there are tons of democrats - including Hillary - urging the same for 2016 with the main evidence being a few facebook ads from russia.
Anyone who writes this has no business accusing anyone else of intellectual dishonesty. Nobody serious claimed that the election had been compromised, as opposed to influenced by outside sources, and on the influence front you're leaving out things like how in addition to Facebook ads there were things like intelligence reports from the U.S. agencies and our allies, the part where Russia hacked the DNC looking for dirt, and, of course, the various contacts and financial disclosures we heard so much about since. Despite considerable pressure to limit the investigation, it still reached the point where Trump had to pardon multiple members of his campaign.
I posted a link to open source code that you can download yourself to analyze the official PA voter records and see proof of several irregularities. As well as video evidence of ballot harvesting, some of which actually has been prosecuted. It's not vague at all. Again, I don't believe all of it, but covering your eyes and ears and saying "no proof" is intellectually dishonest.
Providing voters with accurate information about how and where they can cast their ballot is not the same as buying ad space on Facebook to run ads with doctored images and outright false information.
Domestic groups and individuals are expected to be involved in elections. Foreign ones, by law, are not. An obvious difference and I doubt you're unaware of it.
The Intercept published an interesting (and, I suspect, related) article[1] today about the chamber of commerce no longer being the darling of the GOP. Retribution for not loyally supporting the big election lie, perhaps?
> They executed national public-awareness campaigns that helped Americans understand how the vote count would unfold over days or weeks, preventing Trump’s conspiracy theories and false claims of victory from getting more traction.
An information campaign and a disinformation campaign are hardly the same.
