#recount2016
- Thread starter MegaPoke
- Start date
What stage was harrassing electors and doxing Trump donors?
That's crybaby libs showing their tolerance. Business as Usual. Not tied to election results, just their virtue.
Uh oh, @davidallen and @syskatine Obama thinks you are full of shit. In fact, I'd argue he wanted her to lose knowing full well she'd be a disaster of epic proportions.
Yeah, it will be the only time in eight years they actually question him. Sad right?
Just trying to protect the scraps of respectable legacy.
Clinton having Stein do her dirty work, would look worse if she actually challenged herself. Stein will be paid with funds raised. Nothing will come of it except a second round of protests, cry rooms, cancelled classes and further destruction of the Democrat party. I can't wait.
Last edited:
Sys is a damaged Paul Krugman? Davidallen certainly acts the part. Article diagnosis Sys for his Bush derangement syndrome, as well.
http://thefederalist.com/2016/11/24...es-the-damaged-political-psyches-of-the-left/
Article about how this election...
"exposes perhaps just how fragile the political psyche of modern American liberalism is. The current American Left—the most prominent set of politicians, pundits, writers and academics working today—was forged in the fire of the Bush years, for the Left a time of paranoia, nonstop anger, smug self-righteous back-patting and intellectual balkanizing. These tendencies have been present among progressives for decades, of course, but it is hard to overstate just how much George W. Bush exacerbated them. Prominent among these liberals, of course, is Paul Krugman, who was a constant, sneering critic of both Bush and Republicans more generally during those years.
The election of Barack Obama allowed the Left to channel these behaviors proactively rather than reactively: instead of screaming every time George Bush blinked, or holding anti-war protests in a desperate attempt to recapture the Yippie magic, they could apply all the moral preening and political posturing in an active way. They did this for eight years, and though they had varying degrees of success due to oppositional congressional majorities, they had the presidency at the very least. (For good measure, they constantly kept alive the specter of George Bush, blaming him for virtually all of the nation’s problems even after two terms of his successor.)"
http://thefederalist.com/2016/11/24...es-the-damaged-political-psyches-of-the-left/
Article about how this election...
"exposes perhaps just how fragile the political psyche of modern American liberalism is. The current American Left—the most prominent set of politicians, pundits, writers and academics working today—was forged in the fire of the Bush years, for the Left a time of paranoia, nonstop anger, smug self-righteous back-patting and intellectual balkanizing. These tendencies have been present among progressives for decades, of course, but it is hard to overstate just how much George W. Bush exacerbated them. Prominent among these liberals, of course, is Paul Krugman, who was a constant, sneering critic of both Bush and Republicans more generally during those years.
The election of Barack Obama allowed the Left to channel these behaviors proactively rather than reactively: instead of screaming every time George Bush blinked, or holding anti-war protests in a desperate attempt to recapture the Yippie magic, they could apply all the moral preening and political posturing in an active way. They did this for eight years, and though they had varying degrees of success due to oppositional congressional majorities, they had the presidency at the very least. (For good measure, they constantly kept alive the specter of George Bush, blaming him for virtually all of the nation’s problems even after two terms of his successor.)"
Bush, Bush, Bush has finally run its course and now it's Russia, Russia, Russia?
“The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War’s been over for 20 years.”
–President Obama, during the third presidential debate, Oct. 22, 2012
It should concern every American that Russia is willing to engage in such hostile acts in order to help Donald Trump become president. pic.twitter.com/fwEKWrXKE2
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) October 8, 2016
–President Obama, during the third presidential debate, Oct. 22, 2012
It should concern every American that Russia is willing to engage in such hostile acts in order to help Donald Trump become president. pic.twitter.com/fwEKWrXKE2
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) October 8, 2016
So you believe him when he says the Russians didn't hack the election, but he's a fool and a liar when his head of National Intelligence says the Russians likely did hack the DNC emails?
Weird.
ANY American citizen should if they can pay for it. Why is transparency a bad thing? Who is hurt?
I'll be surprised if recounts lead to anything, but I can't see why anyone would have a problem with it. Particularly with the Russian meddling in the election. They're capable of anything.
You would have a problem with it if she won and Trump was contesting as every good progressive predicted he would.
Not really. My issue would be general Trump brattiness where he accuses and attacks if he simply doesn't get his way. If it satisfies people that the system is transparent, go ahead. Nobody can bitch then. If a recount would have been denied Trump, he'd scream cover up. Recounts rarely change anything. If you don't want to hear the other side bitch they were cheated, give them a recount. What can they bitch about then? What's the harm?
Any American is a bit much. The process would never end.
Anybody who was a candidate on the ballot should be able to request a recount IF they can provide evidence of possible tampering or technical difficulties. Otherwise it's just an exercise in busy work for election officials regardless of who is paying. A couple of computer geeks who claim there may have been tampering but have zero proof but their tin foil hats doesn't cut it in my opinion.
Any recount should include a requirement that voters were eligible to cast a vote and that each person only voted once as part of the process. Democrats constantly state that our elections don't have any fraudulent voting. If there is evidence of tampering or technical difficulty to cause a recount, all possible avenues for fraud should also be closely examined.
To be very honest, the harm - however minimal or unlikely, is unprecedented civil unrest if some unknown monkeying got done with the ballots between the vote and the recount, and this election got reversed. Under normal conditions this is all harmless mental masturbation but one thing Wikileaks showed us is that collusion between the campaign, media and DNC to engineer a desired outcome was significant. It really doesn't take a tin foil leap to imagine election oversight being similarly compromised somehow.
Highly unlikely it could be done with the world watching but that's my remote concern - basically a coup by Soros.
There's nothing to gain by entertaining this nonsense - but it opens the door for massive vote fraud. No thanks. Election is over.
LOL - CNN forced to cover Trump's latest Tweet. (Look at their cheeky headline)
What better time to have a national dialogue on illegals voting than during a recount?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/27/politics/donald-trump-voter-fraud-popular-vote/index.html
Great analysis:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...lar-vote-if-you-deduct-millions-illegal-votes
What better time to have a national dialogue on illegals voting than during a recount?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/27/politics/donald-trump-voter-fraud-popular-vote/index.html
Great analysis:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...lar-vote-if-you-deduct-millions-illegal-votes
You would think hillary would know when she's been licked.
Although amusing to watch the reactions of the media, I really wish Trump would STFU about the recounts and get back to the transition to MAGA. We all know illegal voting happens, but it isn't near enough to change the course of an election. Otherwise the Democrats would control both chambers and the presidency.
Keep moving forward Trump. You're distracting your growing support with more nonsense.
If this is her motive, I'd let the FBI throw the book st her.
Yep. Burn the f'ing swamp after it's drained.
No, I just trust Assange more and he's said it wasn't the Russians
No, I've cited him approvingly before. Not sure if I did here.
So why cite him now instead of Assange? I personally don't trust either one of them enough to claim definitively to know whether or not it was the Russians.
Haven't seen you do it here. Guess we'll just have to take your word for it.
Trump is taking over the Oval Office on January 20th and the left had just better get used to it.
He's new to this part of the world. He'd have more cred if he was my assistant back in the day. Maybe. Oh, probably not. You jerks.
