Trump riot developments

Bill4411

All-American
Gold Member
Jun 24, 2001
7,334
2,615
113
F for originality.

You can do much better.
berlin-the-reichstag-fire-1112x630.jpg
 

Stuffshot

All-American
Feb 20, 2008
8,692
3,828
113
"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?
Can you give us the names of the witnesses who have firsthand knowledge of these important allegations?

Didn't think so.
 

Stuffshot

All-American
Feb 20, 2008
8,692
3,828
113
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.
Arizona?? Not really.

Isn't the "audit" only being conducted for one county in Arizona? That's not going to reflect the extent of fraud under Arizona's statewide rules. The "auditors" are not even trying to make it look valid.

Edit to add: Looks like Trump is helping with the Maricopa audit now, and he's having just the effect you would expect him to have:

 
Last edited:

Bowlmania

All-Big Ten
Sep 23, 2016
3,993
8,798
113
It appears you don't want to talk about the issues raised, but instead start flinging insults.

Typical of 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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IU_Hickory

DANC

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
11,390
15,756
113
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?
 

DANC

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
11,390
15,756
113
Can you give us the names of the witnesses who have firsthand knowledge of these important allegations?

Didn't think so.
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!
 

Stuffshot

All-American
Feb 20, 2008
8,692
3,828
113
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!
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.

The most entertaining thing about these stupid, false election fraud claims is that they consist of (1) claims by one group of Republicans, (2) that another group of Republican election officials intentionally relaxed election rules so that (3) Democrat Biden could claim victory.

C'mon man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IU_Hickory

Cortez88

All-Big Ten
Jan 7, 2017
3,521
4,095
113
I don’t recall saying that. But I would have - and apparently been wrong
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.

 

mcmurtry66

All-American
Gold Member
Mar 14, 2019
9,700
7,708
113
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.

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
 
Last edited:

Cortez88

All-Big Ten
Jan 7, 2017
3,521
4,095
113
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
Remind me, how many Hillary flags did you ever see?

Assuming it’s the minority of the current GOP is where I believe you are wrong. They are running the asylum right now. It’s fully 100% the Trump party.
 

mcmurtry66

All-American
Gold Member
Mar 14, 2019
9,700
7,708
113
Remind me, how many Hillary flags did you ever see?
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.

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
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: stollcpa and NPT

NPT

Moderator
Moderator
Aug 28, 2001
12,647
1,548
113
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
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 76-1 and mcmurtry66
May 11, 2010
2,491
2,378
113
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.

If you can't win, change the rules.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC

Cortez88

All-Big Ten
Jan 7, 2017
3,521
4,095
113
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 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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IU_Hickory

mcmurtry66

All-American
Gold Member
Mar 14, 2019
9,700
7,708
113
She conceded hours after the polls closed. Please stop with the false equivalence.
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....
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: stollcpa

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
20,467
7,885
113
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.
 

IU_Hickory

Senior
Aug 29, 2017
2,682
2,427
113
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.

I bet Comey regrets how he handled things back then. Probably had the oh crap, what did I do moment.
 

mcmurtry66

All-American
Gold Member
Mar 14, 2019
9,700
7,708
113
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.
 
Last edited:

Bowlmania

All-Big Ten
Sep 23, 2016
3,993
8,798
113
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....
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.

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.
 

i'vegotwinners

Hall of Famer
Dec 1, 2006
11,335
3,696
113
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.

Hilary 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.


110106-Spy_Vs_Spy.jpg
 
Last edited:

mcmurtry66

All-American
Gold Member
Mar 14, 2019
9,700
7,708
113
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.

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.
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
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DANC

mcmurtry66

All-American
Gold Member
Mar 14, 2019
9,700
7,708
113
Hilary 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.
Exactly. This isn’t something novel and unique to republicans. It’s trump being trump so the volume is turned up
 

Bowlmania

All-Big Ten
Sep 23, 2016
3,993
8,798
113
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
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.
 

mcmurtry66

All-American
Gold Member
Mar 14, 2019
9,700
7,708
113
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.
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.

Regardless we’re not changing each other’s minds. Don’t work too hard
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 76-1 and DANC

i'vegotwinners

Hall of Famer
Dec 1, 2006
11,335
3,696
113
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.

actually, Russia tried to help Clinton, not Trump.

but Icelandic hackers hacked the Russian hackers to make it look like the Russians were helping Trump instead of Clinton.

totally irrelevant though, since Bill Gates hacked all the voting machines to switch every other Clinton vote to a Trump vote, which resulted in Trump stealing the election..

here's the proof.

any discrepancies in the readout are due to China hacking Gates, who were then hacked by Lindell who manipulated the readout.

NQpxb.oq1b.1.jpg
 
  • Haha
Reactions: IU_Hickory

DANC

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
11,390
15,756
113
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.

Tell me another fairy tale, grandpa.
 

cosmickid

All-American
Oct 23, 2009
9,010
4,657
113
"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?
Secrets like they mysterious appearance of ballots after the counting stopped unexpectedly?

OK, we can officially welcome you to the crazy train. All of those claims have been debunked, but feel free to link to a supposed instance so we can provide the link to the debunking.

This is reminiscent of the Trumpers who were upset because they were convinced only votes counted on election day should be counted in tallies. Guess they never heard of absentee ballots. Just one of the downfalls of a candidate who excites political novices who have no real idea of how voting in America works...

What's a tranch?
 

Latest posts