<deleted content>
Yeah I saw this too. Not really surprising.
<deleted content>
Andrew McCarthy over at National Review said the same. It doesn't help Trump's case that there were, in fact, GOP observers when they initially claimed there weren't, and this was in front of a Bush-appointed judge. He may be able to get the late votes invalidated and I think the PA voter rolls showed something like 843 anomalies on the date of birth front, but I'm not sure that's enough to turn the tide. Though if it is, fine, but then that means he has to also show all three of Georgia, Wisconsin, and Michigan also had not only significant issues but actually resulted in the outcome being changed. And I honestly don't see that at this point considering how down-ballot Republicans performed.
<deleted content>
That's worst case but I think it's really unlikely. Loeffler's campaign had a second Republican siphoning off votes...if they all go for her, which is likely, that's 51 Republicans right there. And I'd expect the same for Perdue, given Georgia's history.
<deleted content>
This I disagree with. What ended up happening was it cost the Democrats swing districts and put the GOP in a position to take back the House because the Democrats were the ones being unreasonable. Likewise with ACB, it's a last-minute boost to his campaign because he actually followed a pledge.
Trump had the unique position of having relatively popular policies but being extremely irritating to a lot of voters personally. He wasted his time picking stupid fights (like with McCain's family, who are pretty popular in AZ) and also hindering his ability to hire good people into his administration. Him talking out of his ass on Twitter is one thing, it's another to do it while being president.
Meanwhile things like insisting he won in an Electoral College landslide in 2016 (he didn't, he finished in the bottom fifth) or making a big deal about the size of his inauguration crowds being bigger than Obama's (they weren't and anyway who gives a shit since he still won) instead of going "Well, I clearly have to win at least some of the GOP base back over" which would have helped.
Hell, if he'd been able to rein in his behavior for the first debate or spent his time at press conferences on something other than repeatedly insisting things would improve shortly or picking stupid fights, he'd likely have won.
In any case, rather that complaining about the need to "purge neocons" from the party (along with alleged 'RINOs' who just don't like Trump personally) maybe the focus should be on taking the good parts of Trump's campaign like outreach to minorities and figuring out an agenda with broad appeal to moderates and the right together? Instead of demanding 'purity' like the Democrats have over the past 20 years?
