rojo wrote:
So I taped the debate on CNN. I'm now watching the post-debate analysis. I'm like falling out of my chair.
Look another liberal rag that thinks it's a big deal:
http://www.wsj.com/The WSJ is in on the conspiracy!
(Did you notice that Trump admitted that he believes the Emmy Awards was rigged against him, too. Hilarious.)
rojo and others who pretend like this isn't a HUGE deal: how are you this blind??!?!?!
Nothing like this has ever been suggested in the history of US elections. Gore rightfully contested a state that was so close the results weren't clear and then completely accepting the result when a decision had been made has absolutely nothing in common with what Trump said tonight.
That was the absolutely most disturbing, dangerous, un-American, and anti-Democracy thing I've ever heard come from a presidential candidate's mouth. Of all the disgusting and vile things Trump has said over the past year, this is the worst because it actually attacks the heart of the American democratic process.
I would expect any child who has taken elementary school social studies classes to understand this. If you don't, well you are severely lacking in education. Maybe this explains why Trump supporters lap up his "make america great again" slogan - they literally have no idea what makes america great. The peaceful transference of power is one of the things that makes america great.
This is not faux outrage. If you don't feel outraged by this then you really don't understand America at all, or you are just so blinded by party that you have completely lost sight of the country.
This will be the biggest (bigly?) headline coming out of this debate. This debate will probably be remembered historically for this statement by Trump, that's how bad it is.
In 2012 Trump tweeted ""He lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election. We should have a revolution in this country!" And this is when he wasn't even running.This could get ugly if he posts shit like this on election night and asks those "second amendment people" to act.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/02/in-2012-donald-trump-suggested-that-the-result-was-rigged-he-warned-of-the-same-thing-this-week/Asking for a recount when the results differed by .01% in Florida is not the same thing as saying " We should have a revolution in this country!" when the election wasn't even really that close in 2012. I wish I could vote Republican, but we lost this election in the primaries. This guys I bat shit crazy and dangerous and may be calling out the militias on the evening of November 8th.
Honest mistake??? wrote:
Dosnsnnssn wrote:Sorry when did Al Gore complain that the election was rigged before during and after the election?
Was there video of Republicans planning and discussing how they have been rigging elections for 50 years by having people vote in multiple states? This is exactly what the videos recently released show the Democrats doing. Was there video of Republicans coordinating with groups to incite violence at Gore events? This is what Democrat operative, Robert Creamer and others have been doing at Trump/Pence events. Strangely, Creamer is a felon who has visited the White House over 300 times, including 45 times to specifically visit President Obama.
Was there evidence released like the Podesta emails showing MSM reporters colluding with the Bush campaign? Was Bush given questions in advance, the way Donna Brazille - who at the time worked for CNN - provided Clinton? How about the revelations exposed about the NYT's, Washington Post, CNN's John Harwood, and others openly helping the Clinton campaign not only against Trump, but against Bernie Sanders? It is essential to have a media that isn't completely biased against one candidate. They were literally cheering for her during the debate in the holding pen tonight. Is that what we really want?
If the media only acts as a cheerleader to elect Clinton, do you think anything will change once she is elected? Of course not.
webby wrote:
rojo wrote:So I taped the debate on CNN. I'm now watching the post-debate analysis. I'm like falling out of my chair.
Look another liberal rag that thinks it's a big deal:
http://www.wsj.com/The WSJ is in on the conspiracy!
(Did you notice that Trump admitted that he believes the Emmy Awards was rigged against him, too. Hilarious.)
Fox News is doing the same thing!
Just crazy that one candidate makes a mockery of a basic tenet of our Democracy and the media is attacking him for that!
As lots of posters have been saying: Trump has been claiming at his rallies that if he looses the election must be rigged. This is fundamentally different than the hanging chad thing.
In the 2000 election, people cast their votes, ballots were being counted, and there was a technology issue with how machines were counting imperfect ballots. Back then, the principle of democracy was fine, but there possibly was an issue with the technological logistics of democracy.
Trump is claiming the election is rigged, i.e.: votes are purposefully not being counted for a political reason. He is claiming the principle of democracy is absent, which is fundamemtal to our country.
If the election really was rigged, that would be grounds for some sort of dramatic action. Since Trump is running for the most powerful position in the world, his words are important. And he is claiming our government is not practically ineffective and flawed, but fundamentally a sham (a democracy with predetermined elections is not a democracy). It is a huge claim. It is inspiring talks of revolt, revolution and violence. But I don't know of any credible evidence, and the election hasn't even happened yet. His words (particilarly what he has said at rallys) are potentialy inciting an unjustified revolt. Can you see how that is different?
codeman wrote:
rojo and others who pretend like this isn't a HUGE deal: how are you this blind??!?!?!
Because they care nothing for a functioning Republic. Power is delivered to their home by free market angels. The streets pave themselves.
Redstate Nation wrote:
In 2012 Trump tweeted ""He lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election. We should have a revolution in this country!" And this is when he wasn't even running.This could get ugly if he posts shit like this on election night and asks those "second amendment people" to act.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/02/in-2012-donald-trump-suggested-that-the-result-was-rigged-he-warned-of-the-same-thing-this-week/Asking for a recount when the results differed by .01% in Florida is not the same thing as saying " We should have a revolution in this country!" when the election wasn't even really that close in 2012.
I wish I could vote Republican, but we lost this election in the primaries. This guys I bat shit crazy and dangerous and may be calling out the militias on the evening of November 8th.
Honest mistake??? wrote:Was there video of Republicans planning and discussing how they have been rigging elections for 50 years by having people vote in multiple states? This is exactly what the videos recently released show the Democrats doing. Was there video of Republicans coordinating with groups to incite violence at Gore events? This is what Democrat operative, Robert Creamer and others have been doing at Trump/Pence events. Strangely, Creamer is a felon who has visited the White House over 300 times, including 45 times to specifically visit President Obama.
Was there evidence released like the Podesta emails showing MSM reporters colluding with the Bush campaign? Was Bush given questions in advance, the way Donna Brazille - who at the time worked for CNN - provided Clinton? How about the revelations exposed about the NYT's, Washington Post, CNN's John Harwood, and others openly helping the Clinton campaign not only against Trump, but against Bernie Sanders? It is essential to have a media that isn't completely biased against one candidate. They were literally cheering for her during the debate in the holding pen tonight. Is that what we really want?
If the media only acts as a cheerleader to elect Clinton, do you think anything will change once she is elected? Of course not.
Hopefully Kellyanne Conway or Ivanka will take away his cellphone on election night.
Rojo is not comparing apples to apples here
I for one am not outraged by Trump's comment.
Why? Because the words of a fool who has no chance to win the presidency matters not to me. Trump's foolish comments, his ignorant comments, his odious behavior, his history of racism and misogyny, only make me sad because people still support him.
Rojo, you really should be ashamed of yourself for defending him in any way.
norphxc wrote:
...It is a huge claim. It is inspiring talks of revolt, revolution and violence. But I don't know of any credible evidence, and the election hasn't even happened yet. His words (particilarly what he has said at rallys) are potentialy inciting an unjustified revolt. Can you see how that is different?
Have you guys not been keeping up with this election? There is plenty of evidence that a potential for rigging exists. Have you not seen how the Democrats have controlled the media throughout this whole election? Did you not hear about the missing votes in New York? Did you not see how the DNC colluded against Sanders? Are you seriously saying that the Democrats doing those things isn't fundamentally against the idea of Democracy???
Further, Trump said it depends on what happens. How can you blame him for not being able to predict the future? He doesn't know if it will be an honest election or not until it actually happens.
Any state Trump wins in this election deserves to be laughed at throughout the world for being the idiotic, redneck land that it is.
Honest mistake??? wrote:
Dosnsnnssn wrote:Sorry when did Al Gore complain that the election was rigged before during and after the election?
Was there video of Republicans planning and discussing how they have been rigging elections for 50 years by having people vote in multiple states? This is exactly what the videos recently released show the Democrats doing. Was there video of Republicans coordinating with groups to incite violence at Gore events? This is what Democrat operative, Robert Creamer and others have been doing at Trump/Pence events. Strangely, Creamer is a felon who has visited the White House over 300 times, including 45 times to specifically visit President Obama.
Was there evidence released like the Podesta emails showing MSM reporters colluding with the Bush campaign? Was Bush given questions in advance, the way Donna Brazille - who at the time worked for CNN - provided Clinton? How about the revelations exposed about the NYT's, Washington Post, CNN's John Harwood, and others openly helping the Clinton campaign not only against Trump, but against Bernie Sanders? It is essential to have a media that isn't completely biased against one candidate. They were literally cheering for her during the debate in the holding pen tonight. Is that what we really want?
If the media only acts as a cheerleader to elect Clinton, do you think anything will change once she is elected? Of course not.
Why are you asking all of these questions? Are you confused?
Pretty Gore didn't say the election was rigged.
The Gallant Pig Man wrote:
Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:Took in $177.8m in 2015 and paid out $6m in charity, that is terrible.
It's also not true.
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/
I had just read the IRS disclosure statement before this thread was posted and my statements are correct (and I am a well known economic commentator). The Clinton's took in the money in 2015, and about $80m from that year got added to assets. This money could be distributed to worthy causes at a later date (which would be good) but not in 2015. I learnt something may years ago, always check out the sources yourself and never rely upon someone else's inferior reviews.
The truth is as Rojo stated these are both flawed candidates which is correct. But CNN & Co were going on and on about how offended they were by Trump saying he will wait and see. I would say the same thing.
Some guy researched the bios of the news execs 2 weeks after they made Michael Brown the top story in the USA and found the following:
CBS President David Rhodes is the brother of Ben Rhodes, Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications.
ABC News executive producer Ian Cameron is married to Susan Rice, Obama’s National Security Advisor.
CNN's Chris 'possession of stolen emails is illegal' Cuomo is the brother of NY gov. Andrew Cuomo, a democrat who endorsed Hillary.
NBC News Political Analyst, David Axelrod was Obama's Chief Campaign Advisor and Senior Advisor directly to Obama himself.
NBC CEO Stephen Burke is a Board Member of Warren Buffet’s Company Berkshire Hathaway. Buffet donated 920 million dollars to Obama’s campaign.
NBC’s moderator for Meet the Press, David Gregory, is married to Beth Wilkinson, a lawyer defending Hillary in her email scandal.
ABC News correspondent Claire Shipman is married to former White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, who now works for CNN as a commentator.
ABC News and Univision reporter Matthew Jaffe is married to Katie Hogan, Obama’s Deputy Press Secretary.
ABC News chief political correspondent and anchor George Stephanopoulos was the White House Communications Director then Senior Advisor for Policy and Strategy for Bill Clinton, and was just caught secretly donating $75,000 to the Clinton foundation.
ABC President Ben Sherwood is the brother of Obama’s Special Adviser Elizabeth Sherwood.
CNN President Virginia Moseley is married to former Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Secretary Tom Nides.
NBC Chelsea Clinton was making $600,000.00 a year + benefits as a starting reporter.
Univision’s Emmy Award Winning Anchor Jorge Ramos’s daughter is working on Hillary Clinton’s Presidential campaign.
Yahoo is partnered with ABC News. The CEO of yahoo, Marissa Mayer is also an Obama campaign donor who has donated over $300,000.00 to Obama’s campaigns and has even hosted Obama fundraisers in her own home.
That's nice and everything. Only, you'll find the same nepotism exists on the Right.
You'll find plenty of nepotism in most industries, actually.
rojo wrote:
So I taped the debate on CNN. I'm now watching the post-debate analysis. I'm like falling out of my chair.
They are making it a huge deal of Trump's statement. I thought it was maybe just a twitter thing.
Wolf Blitzer just started his post-race analysis by saying, "Clearly the headline" is Donald Trump saying he may not accept the election result. He then added, "It's truly extraordinary. I've never heard anything like that."
The other guy acted like the statement disqualified him from being president.
Really?
Gore did exactly that in 2000. Trump didn't call for mob violence. He just said he'd wait to see what happens. If a president lost an election due to fraud, I would think it would be the most American thing in history to contest it.
There was a thread earlier today from a liberal guy confused about how Trump could say the election was rigged.
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7782463&page=1I explained to him that he meant the media is so in the tank for his opposition it's hard for him to win. This is the #1 example of that.
Rojo,
Seriously,
Get serious.
Even The Daily Nation of Kenya has it. It is a big deal.
http://www.nation.co.ke/news/world/Trump-refuses-to-say-he-will-respect-election-result/1068-3423132-13dkxqtz/index.htmlAnyone who commits to accepting the result of an election that is known to be rigged is a traitor to democracy and should be deported to Saudi Arabia.
Rojo,
I come from a continent where elections concession is a mirage.
Usually, when the other guy refuses to concede, or when elections are stolen by the incumbent, you see machetes and other crude weapons on CNN and the BBC. People hack each other!
In some of these countries, the winner THROWS HIS OPPONENT IN JAIL.
He has even threatened Hillary.
Trump is using an African playbook.
DONALD TRUMP IS RUNNING HIS CAMPAIGN AND CONDUCTING HIMSELF LIKE AN AFRICAN LEADER [DICTATOR].
Pertinent to your question, Al Gore did not run around claiming that the election was rigged and he did concede immediately he reached a legal cul de sac.
The world looks up to America and what Donald said helps no one.
Rojos right to ask this question. Trump say'd he'd wait and see what happens. If there's some hanging chad in Florida he'll probably contest. If he loses in a landslide, probably not. Reasonable.
right on wrote:
rojo wrote:Trump didn't call for mob violence
Rojo, you make a great point. It's extremely ironic that all of the libs are outraged by this since the common theme uniting all of the Black Lives Matter protests is mob violence not accepting the rule of law or trying to get the law to do something they demand whether the facts are there or not.
Since when is the "rule of the law" killing unarmed (or armed but restrained) black men? They are protesting a legitimate injustice that goes ignored and unpunished.
That unarmed dude pulled over in OK getting murked by the female cop for no reason isn't "fact" enough for you?