MrSquished
Lifer
- Jan 14, 2013
- 26,540
- 24,737
- 136
Your hero said the election was being rigged. Anything else that you would like to be edumacated on?
Your hero said the election was being rigged. Anything else that you would like to be edumacated on?
buckshot24
Diamond Member
- Nov 3, 2009
- 9,916
- 85
- 91
He may have, but I recall him talking about the "system" being rigged and not specifically the election.
buckshot24
Diamond Member
- Nov 3, 2009
- 9,916
- 85
- 91
That's how you interpreted it, I didn't. The 2nd amendment people came out and stopped her.
Pretty sure that was referring to project veritas exposing a bunch of democrat operatives and forcing some to resign due to video of them admitting operations supporting voter fraud.
1prophet
Diamond Member
- Aug 17, 2005
- 5,313
- 534
- 126
So Trump now gets to define the Democrat parties ideals and beliefs?
how about the cowardly democrats stand up and hold to their belief of little to no voter fraud that they were constantly harping while laughing at Trump's suggestion of election rigging,
At the very least the Hillary campaign could have asked for the vote recount themselves instead of doing it through their patsy Jill Stein who magically was able to raise more money for a recount than her entire presidential campaign, a recount that has no benefit to her election-wise at all.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 16,883
- 2,192
- 126
There are something north of 166,000 voting precincts in the United States, each one separately administered by a bipartisan group of local citizens.
That's a fact.
To create a conspiracy of some kind under that situation is not only impossible, it is ridiculous.
That is a reasonable inference.
At some point during the Breitbart-manufactured ACORN news-frenzy, someone turned up a handful of ballots -- less than you could count on your fingers -- that had been submitted under names like "Mickey Mouse" and "Goofy." Other instances included a Trump supporter who tried to vote more than once.
That's evidence; that's fact. But it amounts to nothing. In all the cases where the voter fraud was detected, those votes were thrown out.
On the other hand, if one could hack an electronic voting system, the nature of the fraud is entirely different. There, the perpetrator is tampering with all the numbers for thousands of votes. If the individual attempts equate to someone's drunk-driving conviction, the hacking is closer to mass-murder.
I'm a Democrat not because I subscribe to some particular belief, other than I want good government at less cost providing what everybody else wants whether I want it or not. It's a dirty choice of lesser of two evils, and so what? I'm a committed Democrat now because -- over the years since the 70s, I have watched this Greater Evil grow like a cancer.
I can't divine the intentions of Gary Johnson and his buddy Weld or those of Jill Stein. Those parties derive from either belief systems (Libertarianism, for instance) or anti-corporate positions based on a sense of the same thing Trump voters might see: the two-party duopoly. But as separate entities, they have little or no chance of winning. Bannon subverted the GOP with Trump, instead. If Stein and Johnson had merely dropped out, their supporters would swing in the two directions -- more so for Hillary from Stein, Johnson I won't venture either way.
I'm not speaking as a Democrat here; I'm speaking as someone who values his common sense, and my sense of the DNC's and Clinton Campaign's position on this matter.
We agree that we won the popular vote by north of 2 million, and there is no evidence of voter fraud or criminal hacking so far in the solidly blue states where we live. There would otherwise be thousands of chances from different precincts -- red or blue -- for someone to discover it or come forward with the FACTS and EVIDENCE -- of which there is NONE.
Trump supporters apparently don't believe in FACTS and EVIDENCE. "They're guilty because we say they're guilty."
We also agree that the Trump "won" the election. We don't think that a recount is going to change the outcome -- at this point.
We want to look at a recount where computer scientists and statisticians noticed an anomaly in places where the payoff for that sort of crime would be high -- the swing states.
And we want to know if there occurred this more serious kind of election fraud -- thousands of votes at a time, changed with a hack, a Trojan or virus, or anything deliberate from the opposition.
And then -- we want to see how high the culpability goes. It was the same thing with Christie and Bridge-Gate. People in government who wish to subvert the government to further their partisan interests when honest taxpayers and voters expect responsible custodianship.
Now -- that being said -- if the statute of limitations hasn't run out -- let's put
Bush and Cheney on trial. How's that?!!
That's a fact.
To create a conspiracy of some kind under that situation is not only impossible, it is ridiculous.
That is a reasonable inference.
At some point during the Breitbart-manufactured ACORN news-frenzy, someone turned up a handful of ballots -- less than you could count on your fingers -- that had been submitted under names like "Mickey Mouse" and "Goofy." Other instances included a Trump supporter who tried to vote more than once.
That's evidence; that's fact. But it amounts to nothing. In all the cases where the voter fraud was detected, those votes were thrown out.
On the other hand, if one could hack an electronic voting system, the nature of the fraud is entirely different. There, the perpetrator is tampering with all the numbers for thousands of votes. If the individual attempts equate to someone's drunk-driving conviction, the hacking is closer to mass-murder.
I'm a Democrat not because I subscribe to some particular belief, other than I want good government at less cost providing what everybody else wants whether I want it or not. It's a dirty choice of lesser of two evils, and so what? I'm a committed Democrat now because -- over the years since the 70s, I have watched this Greater Evil grow like a cancer.
I can't divine the intentions of Gary Johnson and his buddy Weld or those of Jill Stein. Those parties derive from either belief systems (Libertarianism, for instance) or anti-corporate positions based on a sense of the same thing Trump voters might see: the two-party duopoly. But as separate entities, they have little or no chance of winning. Bannon subverted the GOP with Trump, instead. If Stein and Johnson had merely dropped out, their supporters would swing in the two directions -- more so for Hillary from Stein, Johnson I won't venture either way.
I'm not speaking as a Democrat here; I'm speaking as someone who values his common sense, and my sense of the DNC's and Clinton Campaign's position on this matter.
We agree that we won the popular vote by north of 2 million, and there is no evidence of voter fraud or criminal hacking so far in the solidly blue states where we live. There would otherwise be thousands of chances from different precincts -- red or blue -- for someone to discover it or come forward with the FACTS and EVIDENCE -- of which there is NONE.
Trump supporters apparently don't believe in FACTS and EVIDENCE. "They're guilty because we say they're guilty."
We also agree that the Trump "won" the election. We don't think that a recount is going to change the outcome -- at this point.
We want to look at a recount where computer scientists and statisticians noticed an anomaly in places where the payoff for that sort of crime would be high -- the swing states.
And we want to know if there occurred this more serious kind of election fraud -- thousands of votes at a time, changed with a hack, a Trojan or virus, or anything deliberate from the opposition.
And then -- we want to see how high the culpability goes. It was the same thing with Christie and Bridge-Gate. People in government who wish to subvert the government to further their partisan interests when honest taxpayers and voters expect responsible custodianship.
Now -- that being said -- if the statute of limitations hasn't run out -- let's put
Bush and Cheney on trial. How's that?!!
buckshot24
Diamond Member
- Nov 3, 2009
- 9,916
- 85
- 91
I better reply to this so you don't feel compelled to post it a third time.
Thank you. I enjoyed reading that lady's response to Trump (Cheri Jacobus).
buckshot24
Diamond Member
- Nov 3, 2009
- 9,916
- 85
- 91
Sheik Yerbouti
Lifer
- Feb 16, 2005
- 14,080
- 5,453
- 136
bucky, you're a hack, nothing more, nothing less
fvck you and everything about you. Here are quotes from drumpf literally saying the election would be rigged if he did not win
“The election is absolutely being rigged by the dishonest and distorted media pushing Crooked Hillary – but also at many polling places – SAD.” – 16 October, Twitter
It’s crooked—she’s—she’s guilty of a very, very serious crime. She should not be allowed to run. And just in that respect I say it’s rigged.” - OCTOBER 20, 2016 (http://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/for-trump-the-election-is-rigged-if-a-nasty-woman-can-win)
"And I'm telling you, November 8, we'd better be careful, because that election is going to be rigged," - Aug, 7 2016 (http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-election-rigged-2016-8)
Fvck you bucky.
repoman0
Diamond Member
- Jun 17, 2010
- 5,191
- 4,574
- 136
B-b-but it's nuanced! LOL at anybody who thinks Trump is capable of nuance.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter