User talk:Dmorganwrites

"The electorate" has spoken, it's called the majority of voting Americans that voted for Joe Biden. The Electoral College is going to certify the win based on that electorate, and Congress based on the electoral votes.

"The press" as you say, what we call reliable sources, "deciding" the president-elect based on these plain results from the electorate is sufficient for Wikipedia, because Wikipedia goes by reliable sources.

Your edit has been reverted in entirety for failing to see this. 2600:1012:B024:7B87:0:4D:D78A:3801 (talk) 20:22, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

While this may be the case, it is not consistent with constitution, and since this is the case, a very good many people are being deceived by this worthy publication that Joe Biden is in fact the president elect. He is not, he is no more president elect than I, no more than you. Arguing from reliable sources, if necessary, would be stated in the constitution, and since it has not, it would not matter whether out of a million reliable outlets a million call for Biden. That is simply inconsequential. The Wikipedia page should reflect reality, and that reality is this. "While media outlets have called this election, the election is in dispute based on severe voting irregularities in Arizona and Georgia and a constitutional case in Pennsylvania. Of which of my claims do you level worthy dispute?


 * While media outlets have called this election, the election is in dispute based on severe voting irregularities in Arizona and Georgia and a constitutional case in Pennsylvania. Of which of my claims do you level worthy dispute?


 * Trump, Giuliani, and Powell have thrown dozens and dozens of lawsuits and lost almost all of them; their success rate in lawsuits is nowhere close to the level that would overturn results that voters made clear a month ago. Realize that the media outlets don't unilaterally "decide" or "make up" their calls. They report the calls, as news, based on voters' results. The electorate delivered the results; the election workers, judiciary, and reliable sources all upheld it, and soon enough the Electoral College and Congress will uphold the results voters already decided.


 * But this argument is irrelevant anyway, as people did not have these complaints, questioning that the president-elect awaiting inauguration is indeed the president-elect, in past cycles (including about Trump in 2016). Not until Trump threw a tantrum this year.


 * Arguing from reliable sources, if necessary, would be stated in the constitution


 * No it wouldn't. Wikipedia goes by reliable sources. The US Constitution does not decide Wikipedia's policies. What you and many others that already complained on these talk pages (and got refuted) don't realize that this is is Wikipedia, not a US government institution.


 * By all means if you have anything constructive to say and not just the same line that those complainers already said, go back to the talk page and see what people have to reply about it. 2603:8000:A501:9B00:7CC1:BBA1:74AD:B720 (talk) 02:52, 8 December 2020 (UTC)