You’re right it’s crazy to think Trump and his base would try to overturn the election results.
Republicans Have Already Arranged to Steal This Election
- Thread starter What Would Jesus Do?
- Start date
I could be missing out. Of course there were a gaggle of Trump related predictions that didn't turn out. So I need some evidence to get me there.
I expect some real chatter on the topic but haven't seen any...
I have no doubt that we have minted more MAGA election conspiracists that are looking to get closer to the action. (Election administration duties)
I just don't know anything more than that.
The issue isn’t whether or not a final tally would have given Gore the win. The issue is that the final tally was not allowed to be made.
This thread is trolling gold. Gotta hand this one to OP.
Thing is, a good % of Maddow viewers will absolutely believe this.
Thing is, a good % of Maddow viewers will absolutely believe this.
Or you can look at what is happening and what has happened and make the inescapable conclusion about what will happen.
147 GOP congressmen voted to not certify the last election. Let that sink in. Earlier this month the second largest county in Nevada refused to certify lop-sided primary results after a Trump election denied made a fuss,
You have to be a partisan hack to not see what we are in for if Harris has the votes to win the Electoral College.
Because certainly nothing we have seen in the last four years suggests anything but the most gracious of behavior and acceptance of the will of the people on the part of the GOP.
Conspiracy theories suggest work done undercover and secretively to fool everyone. This is completely in the open with no attempt to fool a soul - just take power by any means necessary.
It's interesting that the idea of circumventing the traditional election process is being dismissed as absurd considering that is exactly what happened last time around.
It’s hard for some to admit how bad the GOP has become given a lifetime emotional investment in the notion that Republicans are superior to Democrats and are the standard bearer of all that is true and right. So…just deny reality and mock those who point it out.
The Dems accepted it so well in 2016... Burning cities and destroying business nationwide is so much more admirable than what right wing extremists did on Jan 6...
sorry, not much high ground to be had by either party there.
The video clips were cut very short to remove context, per usual. There's a very real reason MSNBC doesn't show trump live... He doesn't sound dangerous if you hear all of what he says.
Do you think the Dems new word..."weird" is good strategy? I'm not so sure. Although I saw Kamala pivoted her message to trying to sound like she was tough on illegal immigrants, which is smart. Maybe they're giving up on "orange man bad" and going to talk policy? That would be refreshing.
This has the same energy as saying that nobody had anything to worry about with abortion.
They will have thought at that point they saved America. They won’t start thinking they screwed up until shit really goes down and those rural middle class Magas resemble how Russians live outside of their large cities…
Link to burning cities and business being destroyed in 2016.
Hell, link to deceptive video clips of 147 Congressmen refusing to certify the last election.
How do they stop them if the GQP send a replacement group of electors.
Anti-Trump protests, some violent, erupt for 3rd night nationwide
Police used pepper spray on demonstrators in Portland, Ore., after a peaceful protest turned into what they called a riot.
eu.usatoday.com
Got any other brain busters?
Lemme guess, it is on page 25 of project 25, and it is spelled out clearly!!
Really?!? Were you 10 years old then? Here's one link that literally took 10 seconds of googling to find, but you might want to educate yourself a bit.
Hillary called trump illegit for a long time, as did many leading Dems.
If you're under the age of 25, it's ok, it's not your fault. It was 8 years ago, and continued through...well...most of Trump's presidency.
Burning cities? LOL, just STFU. What a fantastic fairytale. Were there protests? Sure, but your description is humorous and hysterical. What a snowflake you are.
The man called the Georgia secretary of state and demanded that he "find votes" for him.
The man's underlings also set up a fake elector scheme in which the electors produced fake electoral ballots.
Just admit that you don't care about the votes and just want him in power by any means necessary. Because that's clearly what you want when you can just somehow ignore the attempted coup that happened right in front of your face.
He did it before, why in the world would you think he wouldn't try it again? You would have to be an idiot to believe that. And honestly I don't think you are an idiot. I think you just want a MAGA dictator and you don't care about what the votes say anymore.
Fair point. I sometimes fail to remember that leftists are incapable of understanding language, and everything must be stated literally. Sorry, please don't read my posts, I rarely speak in literal terms.
While entire cities didn't burn. My point remains "mostly true."
those protests "burned down cities" in the same way january 6 "burned down the US capitol"
While it’s disappointing to see vandalism associated with a protest and I’m against such actions, not a single fire is seen in that clip. Your exaggeration and embellishing of reality is noted.
Cities is plural, Portland is a city not cities. Which businesses were destroyed?
That you refuse to admit the difference between some random people protesting and 147 Congressman refusing to certify election results and storming the capitol building to stop the certification of the Presidential election says a great deal about your partisanship and refusal to accept reality. That, as already pointed out, you consider it absurd that many GOP officials will do EXACTLY the same thing this time as they did last time (but possibly with more success); is inexcusable.
I would call it deplorable.
I thought we cared about democracy.
The NYT and others followed up, reviewed all the ballots, and concluded Bush won the election.
Are you an election denier too?
Final tally was made.
The Democrats tried to apply different recount standards to Democratic leaning counties and the Supreme Court said that violates equal protection.
Regardless, the votes were counted, and the NYT and other news organizations observed that Bush won the election in Florida.
So I want to know why @What Would Jesus Do? is denying the results of the 2000 election.
Gotta be a Russian stooge fomenting public distrust with these evidence free allegations!
The denial that this is probable is disturbing.
The Orange Turd's confidence in his reelection is based on the distribution of local election officials adequate to not certify vote totals and alter the results.
The Democrats must find a legal way to prevent these officials from preemptively. The courts have proven to be a gateway to hell.
The Orange Turd is a piece of shit.
The Democrats must find a legal way to prevent these officials from preemptively. The courts have proven to be a gateway to hell.
The Orange Turd is a piece of shit.
I know you are deliberately pretending to not understand, and so it is pointless to go on, but I can't help myself.
There was plenty of time to recount all of the votes in Florida, but because Bush was ahead he sued to stop the recount and thus was awarded Florida's electoral votes prematurely. I, for one, was relieved to see the newspaper post-facto counts that confirmed Bush's win. Although prior to that I already felt the total was closer than the margin of error, and so it was almost irrelevant. The issue was the Supreme Court ruling (and, btw, at that time I was fascinated by what was happening and read every court ruling from top to bottom throughout those weeks) was a Catch-22 that was easy to foresee.
Florida law said that during recounts you should look for the clear intention of the voter. The Florida Supreme Court had two choices. They could leave it exactly as their law stipulated, which we all knew SCOTUS would claim was an equal rights violation and thus reject. Or they could have created a standard for all counties to follow, which we all knew SCOTUS would claim was "creating a new law" and thus reject. They said each county should follow the law, and of course their ruling was overturned.
Among those sober-minded people following things closely, the main issue was the predictability that SCOTUS was going to overturn the ruling no matter what, meaning the Electoral Votes were going to be awarded without a recount.
Of course, given everything that has transpired in the last four years, the issues with 2000 now seem quaint.
BUT if that is all you have rattling around in your head and you choose to fill it up with Rachel Maddow and similar ilk you may not have the ability to recognize how taxing it is.
Good to see people calling you out for being full of crap with this take.
Similar threads
