Can you give us the names of the witnesses who have firsthand knowledge of these important allegations?"if people turn informant and reveal still unknown secrets..."
Secrets like they mysterious appearance of ballots after the counting stopped unexpectedly? Or how close to 100% of the tranches were for Biden?
Arizona?? Not really.Nice response, thank you for that. . honestly I more so had Arizona on my mind right now, but I didn't say that (my bad). Either way, thank you for the time you put into this answer.
Wasn't it you just the other day telling me you doubted anyone on this forum actually believed any of this nonsense?i don't believe the election was stolen. i don't believe January 6 was an attempt to overthrow the gov.
I don’t recall saying that. But I would have - and apparently been wrongWasn't it you just the other day telling me you doubted anyone on this forum actually believed any of this nonsense?
Typical of you to play the victim when you're incapable of making an intelligent argument. And take a look in the mirror before accusing others of flinging insults. This thread is loaded with insults from you. In fact, I'm wondering if you were given a timeout for one of your juvenile temper tantrums that went a bit too far. You were gone for a while, and it was wonderfully pleasant without you.It appears you don't want to talk about the issues raised, but instead start flinging insults.
Typical of you.
You still believe in the Easter Bunny, don't you?Typical of you to play the victim when you're incapable of making an intelligent argument. And take a look in the mirror before accusing others of flinging insults. This thread is loaded with insults from you. In fact, I'm wondering if you were given a timeout for one of your juvenile temper tantrums that went a bit too far. You were gone for a while, and it was wonderfully pleasant without you.
You talk about the "mysterious appearance of ballots" as part of your election fraud conspiracy nonsense. There's not a shred of credible evidence to support any claim of fraudulent ballot dumps. It's all been debunked, but of course you're not going to hear that on Fox News, OANN or whatever conspiracy bullshit you subscribe to.
You're the very definition of a Cult 45 member. Sad.
You still believe in the Easter Bunny, don't you?
Evidently you didn't watch television when election oberservers were barred from actually observing the vote count.Can you give us the names of the witnesses who have firsthand knowledge of these important allegations?
Didn't think so.
I told you to get back to your village, Idiot.Says mr flat earther
But you don't even have names of witnesses who personally saw the newspapers covering the windows !! After making up the fraud claim, you now are making up the newspaper claim.Evidently you didn't watch television when election oberservers were barred from actually observing the vote count.
If you would have watched, you would have seen newspapers covering the windows.
But nothing to see here!
Many people have more confidence in the Easter Bunny than they do Donald Trump.You still believe in the Easter Bunny, don't you?
Wow, you've beaten me down with these clever retorts.
When people tell you they are nuts, you should listen. I see many reasonable Republicans poo pooing the notion that the party’s has gone completely nuts. No one really believes the election was stolen. Well, in this very thread a few people told you that’s exactly what they believe.I don’t recall saying that. But I would have - and apparently been wrong
I’m not sure it’s the party as much as Americans. Remember in 2016 there were polls showing that more than 50 percent of Dems believed that the election was rigged and Clinton wasn’t really the choice of the party.When people tell you they are nuts, you should listen. I see many reasonable Republicans poo pooing the notion that the party’s has gone completely nuts. No one really believes the election was stolen. Well, in this very thread a few people told you that’s exactly what they believe.
This recent poll is especially disheartening. So many Americans would rather their team win than democracy succeed.
Remind me, how many Hillary flags did you ever see?I’m not sure it’s the party as much as Americans. Remember in 2016 there were polls showing that more than 50 percent of Dems believed that the election was rigged and Clinton wasn’t really the choice of the party.
He’ll Hillary doesn’t believe the 2016 election “was on the level.”
Americans are crazy. We just don’t know how many. I’d like to think it’s a very vocal minority, but it certainly crosses party lines
I don’t know what that means. I do know there were polls with half the Dems believing Hillary wasn’t the nominee. I also know after the election Hillary said trump’s win “wasn’t on the level.” What message did that send Americans? And I know Hillary was telling biden not to concede if it’s close. Are fringe trumpers more vocal - for sure, but questioning election results isn’t unique to repubs.Remind me, how many Hillary flags did you ever see?
So a valid question is were you outraged over all the rioting and burning buildings around the country last year?Non-responsive whataboutism.
I agree with that. I was suspicious of elections in the last one as well as the 2016 elections. Never under estimate either party's ability to cheat and as power hungry as they are they'll cheat if they can.I believe biden won given the massive margin, but I do believe voting reform is desperately needed to shore up both parties’ faith in elections
If you can't win, change the rules.When people tell you they are nuts, you should listen. I see many reasonable Republicans poo pooing the notion that the party’s has gone completely nuts. No one really believes the election was stolen. Well, in this very thread a few people told you that’s exactly what they believe.
This recent poll is especially disheartening. So many Americans would rather their team win than democracy succeed.
It is a valid question, and I answered it.So a valid question is were you outraged over all the rioting and burning buildings around the country last year?
I think vote integrity is of high importance. I also think we need to be honest about what that means. It is not restricting who votes, how they vote, and when they vote. I want to see the numbers of voters grow and systems we use to be more secure.I agree with that. I was suspicious of elections in the last one as well as the 2016 elections. Never under estimate either party's ability to cheat and as power hungry as they are they'll cheat if they can.
She conceded hours after the polls closed. Please stop with the false equivalence.He’ll Hillary doesn’t believe the 2016 election “was on the level.”
nonresponsive to the issue of legitimacy. she said trump's win wasn't on the level. that's the message she conveyed. conceding is immaterial to questioning the legitimacy of the election. the election was poisoned at that point. so you have a democratic presidential loser saying the election wasn't on the level and a republican presidential loser saying the election wasn't on the level....She conceded hours after the polls closed. Please stop with the false equivalence.
Hillary blamed Comey and blamed Russian Facebook bots for running false information campaigns. That's not an allegation of manufacturing votes or faking ballots. It is absolutely a false equivalency.
Nonsense. It’s questioning the legitimacy of the election. She believed collusion directly affected actual votes; ie votes were changed as a result of Russian interference. In sept of 2017 she was still talking about contesting the election.Hillary blamed Comey and blamed Russian Facebook bots for running false information campaigns. That's not an allegation of manufacturing votes or faking ballots. It is absolutely a false equivalency.
The well was poisoned by Trump long before Clinton said a word about Russian interference or Comey (and she was correct on both counts, by the way). Months before the November 2016 election, Trump kept repeating the "it's rigged, folks!" mantra at all his rallies. We know, of course, he didn't expect to win and was laying the foundation for a false claim of Democratic fraud after he lost. Then, despite winning, he reopened that playbook when his fragile ego couldn't handle the fact that he lost the popular vote. He set up a commission to investigate election fraud in the 2016 election. Not surprisingly, the commission quietly disbanded a few months later, with no findings.nonresponsive to the issue of legitimacy. she said trump's win wasn't on the level. that's the message she conveyed. conceding is immaterial to questioning the legitimacy of the election. the election was poisoned at that point. so you have a democratic presidential loser saying the election wasn't on the level and a republican presidential loser saying the election wasn't on the level....
Nonsense. It’s questioning the legitimacy of the election. She believed collusion directly affected actual votes; ie votes were changed as a result of Russian interference. In sept of 2017 she was still talking about contesting the election.
I don’t like trump. The buzzword “false equivalency” is thrown around too often here without understanding it’s meaning. Clinton in late 2017 was still barking about contesting the election. Too many in this board fail to understand two things can be true. Clinton attacked the legitimacy of the 16 election and trump attacked the legitimacy of the 20 election. What’s more they both continued to do so long after. If you want to try to assign degrees of who is worse whatever. I suspect the difference is that trump has a larger bully pulpit and more vocal deranged diehardsThe well was poisoned by Trump long before Clinton said a word about Russian interference or Comey (and she was correct on both counts, by the way). Months before the November 2016 election, Trump kept repeating the "it's rigged, folks!" mantra at all his rallies. We know, of course, he didn't expect to win and was laying the foundation for a false claim of Democratic fraud after he lost. Then, despite winning, he reopened that playbook when his fragile ego couldn't handle the fact that he lost the popular vote. He set up a commission to investigate election fraud in the 2016 election. Not surprisingly, the commission quietly disbanded a few months later, with no findings.
Then, in 2020, the "I'm the victim of fraud!" playbook was fully reopened after he lost.
Conceding and showing up at the new president's inauguration goes a long way toward reinforcing our time-honored tradition of peaceful transition, demonstrating the strength of our constitutional democracy, and moving on. And it gives legitimacy to the next presidency. Trump didn't have the balls to do this because he's incapable of admitting defeat. It's that simple.
Finally, and as someone suggested above, Clinton wasn't holding post-election rallies, encouraging protestors to "take back our country" or calling election officials and telling them to "find votes."
Unless I'm confusing you with someone else, my recollection is that you claim to not like Trump, yet it seems you're frequently propping him up with false equivalencies. I don't get it.
Exactly. This isn’t something novel and unique to republicans. It’s trump being trump so the volume is turned upHilary not only won the popular vote in 2016, but won every single state in the nation.
not only did she win every state, but she won every single state by the largest landslide ever in every single state.
not only that, but the Dems also won every senate race and every congressional race in the country, even the most gerrymandered districts, and not only won them, but one every single one in a landslide.
in fact, Dems have won every national race since 1980, and won them all in overwhelming landslides.
every single prez, senate, or congressional race, supposedly won by Pubs since 1980, was outright stolen.
that said, Bernie won the primary in both 16 and 20, both in landslides, but both were stolen by the DNC, so there is that.
And then she took it back and whined for 4 years that the election was stolen. She told Biden to never - NEVER - concede.She conceded hours after the polls closed. Please stop with the false equivalence.
The difference is that Clinton was right. There was Russian interference in the 2016 election that was intended to hurt Clinton and help Trump. A bipartisan Senate committee reached that conclusion last summer. Trump's claims, on the other hand, are baseless and bullshit.I don’t like trump. The buzzword “false equivalency” is thrown around too often here without understanding it’s meaning. Clinton in late 2017 was still barking about contesting the election. Too many in this board fail to understand two things can be true. Clinton attacked the legitimacy of the 16 election and trump attacked the legitimacy of the 20 election. What’s more they both continued to do so long after. If you want to try to assign degrees of who is worse whatever. I suspect the difference is that trump has a larger bully pulpit and more vocal deranged diehards
At the time Clinton was throwing a fit and challenging the outcome there was no evidence Russian interference changed a single vote. None. The senate report in 2018 confirmed as much.The difference is that Clinton was right. There was Russian interference in the 2016 election that was intended to hurt Clinton and help Trump. A bipartisan Senate committee reached that conclusion last summer. Trump's claims, on the other hand, are baseless and bullshit.
I fully understand what "false equivalence" means. It's a logical fallacy. What you're doing is a good example.
I've got to get to work. Have a good one.
The difference is that Clinton was right. There was Russian interference in the 2016 election that was intended to hurt Clinton and help Trump. A bipartisan Senate committee reached that conclusion last summer. Trump's claims, on the other hand, are baseless and bullshit.
I fully understand what "false equivalence" means. It's a logical fallacy. What you're doing is a good example.
I've got to get to work. Have a good one.
Who paid for the Steele report? The Clinton campaign.The difference is that Clinton was right. There was Russian interference in the 2016 election that was intended to hurt Clinton and help Trump. A bipartisan Senate committee reached that conclusion last summer. Trump's claims, on the other hand, are baseless and bullshit.
I fully understand what "false equivalence" means. It's a logical fallacy. What you're doing is a good example.
I've got to get to work. Have a good one.
I thought you were a grandpa.Who paid for the Steele report? The Clinton campaign.
Tell me another fairy tale, grandpa.
Secrets like they mysterious appearance of ballots after the counting stopped unexpectedly?"if people turn informant and reveal still unknown secrets..."
Secrets like they mysterious appearance of ballots after the counting stopped unexpectedly? Or how close to 100% of the tranches were for Biden?