2024 Presidential Election thread

[Motor City Sonics]

1 hour ago, Sports_Freak said:

The orange doofus was calling it rigged even before the election. 

He was saying it was rigged when he won in '16 because Hillary got more of the popular vote.  

I told everyone that would listen that if he lost in 2020 that he wouldn't just leave, and it probably came down to 4 or 5 men who actually showed some ****ing backbone (including Pence) that made it happen.    That mistake would not be made again in Trump 2.0.   Constitution says you can be President for more than 2 terms.  Screw that, we'll suspend it and declare Martial Law and he'll make sure he has the people around him who will do just that.     He wins next year and this "democracy" is over.   (It's not actually a real democracy to begin with).  

[Motor City Sonics]

1 minute ago, Motor City Sonics said:

He was saying it was rigged when he won in '16 because Hillary got more of the popular vote.  

I told everyone that would listen that if he lost in 2020 that he wouldn't just leave, and it probably came down to 4 or 5 men who actually showed some ****ing backbone (including Pence) that made it happen.    That mistake would not be made again in Trump 2.0.   Constitution says you can be President for more than 2 terms.  Screw that, we'll suspend it and declare Martial Law and he'll make sure he has the people around him who will do just that.     He wins next year and this "democracy" is over.   (It's not actually a real democracy to begin with).  

Oh, and if he wins again, the second he's President his first move will be pardons to the Jan 6'ers and then he'll start having people who tried to prosecute him arrested.     He's going full dictator if he wins and at least 48% of this country will be just fine with it.  

[pfife]

Trump also claimed the 2016 Iowa Caucuses were rigged when he lost to cancun ted

[chasfh]

16 hours ago, ewsieg said:

Prior to Trump winning, I can give you dozens of quotes from Hillary, Stacy Abrams, so many folks from MSNBC, and so on talking about stolen elections.  They had no problem saying this and their followers had no problem believing it.  Heck, i'm sure you probably still think Russia is the reason why Trump beat Hillary.  

The Electoral College is why Trump TKO’ed Hillary. More people voted for Hillary to be president than voted for Trump.

[Sports_Freak]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

The Electoral College is why Trump TKO’ed Hillary. More people voted for Hillary to be president than voted for Trump.

I still say the reason for that was the incorrect polls. People saw the polls and either stayed home or voted 3rd party. They figured Hillary in a landslide. For someone who whines about "fake news", Trump surely only got elected because of "fake" polls. 

We need a blue wave to totally clean house of these un-American MAGA traitors.

[Tiger337]

3 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

The orange doofus was calling it rigged even before the election. 

He called 2016 rigged before the election too.  He would have done the same thing if he lost that one.  He is completely full of **** and 40% of the country still believes everything he says.    

[Tiger337]

1 hour ago, pfife said:

Trump also claimed the 2016 Iowa Caucuses were rigged when he lost to cancun ted

He lost his 6th grade spelling bee because he could not spell "cat" and he complained that it was a conspiracy.  

[ewsieg]

4 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

So let's see these quotes "you can show us".

Watch the video instead....

https://gop.com/video/12-minutes-of-democrats-denying-election-results/

[ewsieg]

3 hours ago, pfife said:

So you're saying they did not engage in insurrection?

I don't think they did, but they did instill in the minds of many that elections may be rigged.  I do think Trump did engage in an insurrection.  And while this country would be great if we determined our laws based on my own personal decisions, it probably isn't the best idea in a republic.  

[chasfh]

8 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Watch the video instead....

https://gop.com/video/12-minutes-of-democrats-denying-election-results/

The difference being that no Democrat ever incited their followers to storm any capitols to overturn elections that Republicans won.

[ewsieg]

Just now, chasfh said:

The difference being that no Democrat ever incited their followers to storm any capitols to overturn elections that Republicans won.

So, as a whole, I agree with you.  But, if you tell people that an election was rigged against them and stolen from them, quite possible that could lead them to act against the government they feel is not legitimate.  Obviously Trump was blatant, which is a huge difference.

[Tiger337]

19 hours ago, ewsieg said:

Prior to Trump winning, I can give you dozens of quotes from Hillary, Stacy Abrams, so many folks from MSNBC, and so on talking about stolen elections.  They had no problem saying this and their followers had no problem believing it.  Heck, i'm sure you probably still think Russia is the reason why Trump beat Hillary.  

 

The whole Rusian colluson thing was way overplayed.  There was probably some truth to it, but I never saw any solid evidence that there was any collusion or that it swung the election.  It was worth investigating, but the impeachment was weak.  I think the weakness of the frst impeachment made the totally legitimate second impeachment suspect in some eyes. 

[1984Echoes]

3 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

The whole Rusian colluson thing was way overplayed.  There was probably some truth to it, but I never saw any solid evidence that there was any collusion or that it swung the election.  It was worth investigating, but the impeachment was weak.  I think the weakness of the frst impeachment made the totally legitimate second impeachment suspect in some eyes. 

The first impeachment was NOT on Russia...

It was on Trump's attempt to extort Ukraine for a "fake investigation" on Biden by refusing to forward congressionally approved funding to them.

It was a legit impeachment. Probably not strong enough though... which is essentially the same thing as your "weakness on the 1st" and rolls right into your "2nd = suspect in some eyes" comment.

[Sports_Freak]

14 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

So, as a whole, I agree with you.  But, if you tell people that an election was rigged against them and stolen from them, quite possible that could lead them to act against the government they feel is not legitimate.  Obviously Trump was blatant, which is a huge difference.

Yes, telling them it was rigged will get them out to vote for a real American, Joe Biden. And it worked, there are more sane Americans than brain damaged cult members. We just need to get out and vote.

[pfife]

50 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

So, as a whole, I agree with you.  But, if you tell people that an election was rigged against them and stolen from them, quite possible that could lead them to act against the government they feel is not legitimate.  Obviously Trump was blatant, which is a huge difference.

But those words from Democrats didn't lead to insurrection.    Why are we talking in hypotheticals?

Edited December 22, 2023 by pfife

[Tiger337]

1 hour ago, 1984Echoes said:

The first impeachment was NOT on Russia...

It was on Trump's attempt to extort Ukraine for a "fake investigation" on Biden by refusing to forward congressionally approved funding to them.

It was a legit impeachment. Probably not strong enough though... which is essentially the same thing as your "weakness on the 1st" and rolls right into your "2nd = suspect in some eyes" comment.

yes, I had forgotten what it was about because there was so much talk about Russia.  I think they couldn't find enough there, so they despertately switched to Ukraine.  All of it was worth investigating, but nothing impeachment worthy.  It seemed to me like they wanted an impeachment and were looking for something to get one.  Of course, the Clinton impeachment was silly too.  Impeachment should be used for extremely serious crimes which threaten our national security or our constitution.  January 6 qualifies.  

[Dan Gilmore]

One of the reasons for “not finding enough” was AG Barr limiting and distorting what was found. It was still a witch hunt that actually found witches. 

[Sports_Freak]

Did someone say something about election interference? Uhhh...more projection?

 

[chasfh]

3 hours ago, ewsieg said:

So, as a whole, I agree with you.  But, if you tell people that an election was rigged against them and stolen from them, quite possible that could lead them to act against the government they feel is not legitimate.  Obviously Trump was blatant, which is a huge difference.

News flash: your “Democrats could” is not the equivalent of the actual “Trump did”.

[chasfh]

31 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Did someone say something about election interference? Uhhh...more projection?

 

I’ll never forget his 2008 meltdown live on Fox Views. 👨‍🍳💋

[chasfh]

3 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

The whole Rusian colluson thing was way overplayed.  There was probably some truth to it, but I never saw any solid evidence that there was any collusion or that it swung the election. 

Manafort.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/512613-five-takeaways-from-final-senate-intel-russia-report/

You’re welcome.

[Dan Gilmore]

One of the witches, and one of Trump’s campaign managers.

[ewsieg]

2 hours ago, pfife said:

But those words from Democrats didn't lead to insurrection.    Why are we talking in hypotheticals?

We’re talking hypotheticals because if SCOTUS upholds this MAGA members in red states are going to claim this as evidence against Biden and get him removed.  In no way and I trying to make an equivalency in the argument, but if Alabama says democrats were responsible for BLM, it’s over for Biden too

[ewsieg]

4 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

The whole Rusian colluson thing was way overplayed.  There was probably some truth to it, but I never saw any solid evidence that there was any collusion or that it swung the election.  It was worth investigating, but the impeachment was weak.  I think the weakness of the frst impeachment made the totally legitimate second impeachment suspect in some eyes. 

If you listen to that link I sent, the Dems absolutely overplayed Russian collusion, notice no one says that anymore (it's interference now), but listen to the link and you'll hear from Dems how we shouldn't trust electronic ballot boxes, that voter suppression is what caused Abrams to lose, which politifact and others will say 'not determined', but then point to how there was great turnout and even if every provisional ballot went to her, she still would have lost. In fact they found that Georgia had the highest percentage of registered voters in the last 40 years.   Other snippets that if you didn't see them coming out of a democrats mouth, you'd assume it was from MTG.....'Numerous irregularities' , 'independent investigation needed', 'flawed voting process', 'lack of measures to ensure the integrity of electronic voting devices', 'The election was stolen from her', etc.

And again because a few folks seem to think I'm trying to do a Both Sides thing here.  I'm just saying that this is what will be used as an argument by MAGA folks to point at things like Police being targeted and says the left is attempting an insurrection.   If what Colorado stands up, It doesn't matter if you agree with it, it only matters if Alabama or another MAGA lead state does it.

[Sports_Freak]

7 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

If you listen to that link I sent, the Dems absolutely overplayed Russian collusion, notice no one says that anymore (it's interference now), but listen to the link and you'll hear from Dems how we shouldn't trust electronic ballot boxes, that voter suppression is what caused Abrams to lose, which politifact and others will say 'not determined', but then point to how there was great turnout and even if every provisional ballot went to her, she still would have lost. In fact they found that Georgia had the highest percentage of registered voters in the last 40 years.   Other snippets that if you didn't see them coming out of a democrats mouth, you'd assume it was from MTG.....'Numerous irregularities' , 'independent investigation needed', 'flawed voting process', 'lack of measures to ensure the integrity of electronic voting devices', 'The election was stolen from her', etc.

And again because a few folks seem to think I'm trying to do a Both Sides thing here.  I'm just saying that this is what will be used as an argument by MAGA folks to point at things like Police being targeted and says the left is attempting an insurrection.   If what Colorado stands up, It doesn't matter if you agree with it, it only matters if Alabama or another MAGA lead state does it.

So, indict Joe Biden. Well see how far it gets with zero evidence. And in the meantime, Trump is doing everything in his power to delay his trials, hoping he wins so he can pardon himself. He's not so much running to be POTUS, he's running to stay outta prison.