I struggle to understand how anyone can honestly see Clinton, Abrams in the same light as Trump.
1. Hillary Clinton gave a *concession* speech the morning after election night. She did not file any frivolous lawsuits (third-party candidate/grifter Jill Stein did that). She did not try to scheme her way into the Presidency, there was never any question after her concession about her accepting the results, and she did not try to incite any violence or produce fake electors.
2. Stacey Abrams' race was not called formally until about 10 days after election day. The day after it was called, she gave her famous (infamous?) non-concession speech. (Which I would argue was the first of several major political miscalculations on her part, but that is a different topic.) At a ny rate, she did not file any frivolous lawsuits seeking to have the election awarded to her, and in her speech she acknowledged that her opponent and not her would be taking office in January. She did not attempt any schemes to contest the election. At the end of the day, I think Kemp's margin of victory was large enough that an automatic recount was not called for under GA law. Abrams campaign might have been able to push for (and pay for) a recount, but she did not.
3. Trump not only refused to accept the result of the election even after losing dozens of bordeline frivolous lawsuits, but he also did attempt to use violance and fake elector schemes as a way to stay in office via a self-coup.
I struggle to understand how anyone can honestly see Clinton, Abrams in the same light as Trump.
1. Hillary Clinton gave a *concession* speech the morning after election night. She did not file any frivolous lawsuits (third-party candidate/grifter Jill Stein did that). She did not try to scheme her way into the Presidency, there was never any question after her concession about her accepting the results, and she did not try to incite any violence or produce fake electors.
2. Stacey Abrams' race was not called formally until about 10 days after election day. The day after it was called, she gave her famous (infamous?) non-concession speech. (Which I would argue was the first of several major political miscalculations on her part, but that is a different topic.) At a ny rate, she did not file any frivolous lawsuits seeking to have the election awarded to her, and in her speech she acknowledged that her opponent and not her would be taking office in January. She did not attempt any schemes to contest the election. At the end of the day, I think Kemp's margin of victory was large enough that an automatic recount was not called for under GA law. Abrams campaign might have been able to push for (and pay for) a recount, but she did not.
3. Trump not only refused to accept the result of the election even after losing dozens of bordeline frivolous lawsuits, but he also did attempt to use violance and fake elector schemes as a way to stay in office via a self-coup.
One of those is not like the others.