Obama DID steal the last election

[RetiredGySgt]

I have no real proof, but I have as much as the left has against Bush and the claims he stole elections. So I will spend the next however many years obsessing about it and making ignorant claims he did it. As proof I will offer the absence of any real proof. Works so well for the left after all. I figure if I am loud enough and post it enough times people will start to believe it just cause they have heard it so much.

I mean with him controlling the Congress and Justice Department we will never have an investigation so that too is proof he did it. And since the left keeps claiming the electronic voting machines are rigged and he won all those states with them, further proof he stole the election. And lets not forget the long lines to vote around the country, I mean that was used as evidence Bush stole elections so it must now be true that Obama stole the election.

 

[American Horse]

I have no real proof, but I have as much as the left has against Bush and the claims he stole elections. So I will spend the next however many years obsessing about it and making ignorant claims he did it. As proof I will offer the absence of any real proof. Works so well for the left after all. I figure if I am loud enough and post it enough times people will start to believe it just cause they have heard it so much.

I mean with him controlling the Congress and Justice Department we will never have an investigation so that too is proof he did it. And since the left keeps claiming the electronic voting machines are rigged and he won all those states with them, further proof he stole the election. And lets not forget the long lines to vote around the country, I mean that was used as evidence Bush stole elections so it must now be true that Obama stole the election.

That's right Gunny, Remember the left's usual claim that "The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it's the seriousness of the charge that matters." That was the case in the Anita Hill charges against then Judge Clarence Thomas, and it's the basis for "investigating" anything about a Republican in national politics.

 

[DiveCon]

I have no real proof, but I have as much as the left has against Bush and the claims he stole elections. So I will spend the next however many years obsessing about it and making ignorant claims he did it. As proof I will offer the absence of any real proof. Works so well for the left after all. I figure if I am loud enough and post it enough times people will start to believe it just cause they have heard it so much.

I mean with him controlling the Congress and Justice Department we will never have an investigation so that too is proof he did it. And since the left keeps claiming the electronic voting machines are rigged and he won all those states with them, further proof he stole the election. And lets not forget the long lines to vote around the country, I mean that was used as evidence Bush stole elections so it must now be true that Obama stole the election.

naw, you cant keep that up
you dont actually believe it thus you are not braindead

 

[Epsilon Delta]

But Gunny, Obama won by over 10,000,000 votes while Bush won by -500,000. Are they really comparable?

 

[DiveCon]

But Gunny, Obama won by over 10,000,000 votes while Bush won by -500,000. Are they really comparable?

except POTUS isnt eleceted by popular vote

 

[Modbert]

except POTUS isnt eleceted by popular vote

There have been three other times in history where someone won the popular vote but lost the election.

John Quincy Adams stole the election in 1824 over Andrew Jackson.

Rutherford B. Hayes stole the election in 1876 over Samuel Tilden.

Benjamin Harrison stole the election in 1888 over Grover Cleveland.

Notice a pattern here?
Not saying whether Bush stole the election or not, but logically case #4 would follow #1-3.

The circumstances of how Bush came to be President are actually similar to Hayes's if I recall correctly.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

*Shrugs* Whatever. It coincides like 99% of the time, and even then the result went from +5 to +90-something

 

[DiveCon]

*Shrugs* Whatever. It coincides like 99% of the time, and even then the result went from +5 to +90-something

yes, it does usually
but thats not what elects a POTUS
and it doesnt matter if its a +5 or a +1 in the EC vote

 

[RetiredGySgt]

except POTUS isnt eleceted by popular vote

There have been three other times in history where someone won the popular vote but lost the election.

John Quincy Adams stole the election in 1824 over Andrew Jackson.

Rutherford B. Hayes stole the election in 1876 over Samuel Tilden.

Benjamin Harrison stole the election in 1888 over Grover Cleveland.

Notice a pattern here?
Not saying whether Bush stole the election or not, but logically case #4 would follow #1-3.

The circumstances of how Bush came to be President are actually similar to Hayes's if I recall correctly.

You may need to actually read your history books, John Quincy Adams won because the House of Representatives selected him per the Constitution when no one had the needed majority.

Neither of the other two stole the election either, both won because they, following the Constitution, won the required majority of ELECTORAL votes in the Electoral College.

You may want to bone up on how our Presidents have ALWAYS been elected, you seem to not understand the law and the Constitution much at all.

As for Bush , he too won because the ELECTORAL College elected him as required by the Constitution. After he won more electoral votes then Gore and had the required number to qualify per , again, the Constitution.

His win in Florida has been proven over and over by recounts after the fact as well as the official recount. Those extra recounts being conducted by people TRYING to prove Bush lost and failing.

Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.

Article II section 1 of the Constitution.

The electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;--The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--the person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

Amendment 12 to the US Constitution.

Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Section 1 of Amendment 20 to the US Constitution. Replacing the bolded part along with Amendment 25.


LII: Constitution

 

[jaded110]

I have no real proof,

There you go, then.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I have no real proof,

There you go, then.

Just like the loons on the left have zero proof Bush ever stole an election, I guess you just happened to miss that part?

 

[xsited1]

Is Obama a natural born citizen of the United States? Crazy conspiracy theory or valid argument? Did a foreigner 'steal' the election? I guess it doesn't matter since Hawaii has decided NOT to release the long-form certificate and they must have a good reason for doing so, right?

 

[elvis]

*Shrugs* Whatever. It coincides like 99% of the time, and even then the result went from +5 to +90-something

yes, it does usually
but thats not what elects a POTUS
and it doesnt matter if its a +5 or a +1 in the EC vote

Yeah the president can literally win 11 states and be elected president.

 

[elvis]

Is Obama a natural born citizen of the United States? Crazy conspiracy theory or valid argument? Did a foreigner 'steal' the election? I guess it doesn't matter since Hawaii has decided NOT to release the long-form certificate and they must have a good reason for doing so, right?

Then there's the theory that he was born of a jackal.

 

[bk1983]

Is Obama a natural born citizen of the United States? Crazy conspiracy theory or valid argument? Did a foreigner 'steal' the election? I guess it doesn't matter since Hawaii has decided NOT to release the long-form certificate and they must have a good reason for doing so, right?

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that Hawaii Never releases the long form. Only the short form is available in Hawaii.

 

[xsited1]

Is Obama a natural born citizen of the United States? Crazy conspiracy theory or valid argument? Did a foreigner 'steal' the election? I guess it doesn't matter since Hawaii has decided NOT to release the long-form certificate and they must have a good reason for doing so, right?

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that Hawaii Never releases the long form. Only the short form is available in Hawaii.

Fortunately, Obama is just an average citizen. Nothing important to see here.

 

[bk1983]

Is Obama a natural born citizen of the United States? Crazy conspiracy theory or valid argument? Did a foreigner 'steal' the election? I guess it doesn't matter since Hawaii has decided NOT to release the long-form certificate and they must have a good reason for doing so, right?

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that Hawaii Never releases the long form. Only the short form is available in Hawaii.

Fortunately, Obama is just an average citizen. Nothing important to see here.

Do you suggest Hawaii change it's laws to appease tin foil enthusiasts?

 

[Paulie]

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that Hawaii Never releases the long form. Only the short form is available in Hawaii.

Fortunately, Obama is just an average citizen. Nothing important to see here.

Do you suggest Hawaii change it's laws to appease tin foil enthusiasts?

For the sake of a presidential election, would it really have been so much to ask? If there's nothing dubious about it, why not put the damn theory to rest?

 

[bk1983]

Fortunately, Obama is just an average citizen. Nothing important to see here.

Do you suggest Hawaii change it's laws to appease tin foil enthusiasts?

For the sake of a presidential election, would it really have been so much to ask? If there's nothing dubious about it, why not put the damn theory to rest?

For the same reason the federal government doesn't release the rest of the videos of the plane crashing into the pentagon. This is a conspiracy theory period, and the government doesn't make exceptions or new rules to appease those who believe in them.

 

[DiveCon]

Do you suggest Hawaii change it's laws to appease tin foil enthusiasts?

For the sake of a presidential election, would it really have been so much to ask? If there's nothing dubious about it, why not put the damn theory to rest?

For the same reason the federal government doesn't release the rest of the videos of the plane crashing into the pentagon. This is a conspiracy theory period, and the government doesn't make exceptions or new rules to appease those who believe in them.

i guess they want to put in question every single HI birth certificate