Presidential concession speeches show the strength of our democracy and the character of our leaders

[TemplarKormac]

Didn't say they do.

Then why do we keep voting for these people?

 

[Pogo]

That is, unless you of all people have suddenly come up with some kind of evidence of "cheating". Which, if so, why did you hold out until now?

The absence of evidence does not imply evidence is absent.

--- and the burden of proof lies with the asserter. Check your post.

"It coulda happened" is not the same as "it happened".
Just as "Oringe Jesus said it happened" is in NO way the same as "it happened".

 

[Pogo]

Didn't say they do.

Then why do we keep voting for these people?

Because the Duopoly has a stranglehold and they give us a choice between "Bad" and "Worse", ergo the only way to prevent the latter is the former.

 

[TemplarKormac]

That is, unless you of all people have suddenly come up with some kind of evidence of "cheating". Which, if so, why did you hold out until now?

The absence of evidence does not imply evidence is absent.

--- and the burden of proof lies with the asserter. Check your post.

"It coulda happened" is not the same as "it did happen".

Of course, and you are asserting it didn't happen. The burden lies also with you.

Or, one can also ignore the presented evidence, which does satisfy the burden, and easily say "there is no evidence."

My, there are a lot of rabbits in this hole.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Didn't say they do.

Then why do we keep voting for these people?

Because the Duopoly has a stranglehold and they give us a choice between "Bad" and "Worse", ergo the only way to prevent the latter is the former.

Then our republic/democracy is effectively dead.

 

[Pogo]

That is, unless you of all people have suddenly come up with some kind of evidence of "cheating". Which, if so, why did you hold out until now?

The absence of evidence does not imply evidence is absent.

--- and the burden of proof lies with the asserter. Check your post.

"It coulda happened" is not the same as "it did happen".

Of course, and you are asserting it didn't happen. The burden lies also with you.

NO I AM NOT.
Go ahead, quote me.
Can't find it?

Only one of us has an assertion here. I don't assert unless I can prove, because I don't believe unless I SEE proof.

 

[Pogo]

Didn't say they do.

Then why do we keep voting for these people?

Because the Duopoly has a stranglehold and they give us a choice between "Bad" and "Worse", ergo the only way to prevent the latter is the former.

Then our republic/democracy is effectively dead.

Aye, but that's not new.

 

[TemplarKormac]

That is, unless you of all people have suddenly come up with some kind of evidence of "cheating". Which, if so, why did you hold out until now?

The absence of evidence does not imply evidence is absent.

--- and the burden of proof lies with the asserter. Check your post.

"It coulda happened" is not the same as "it did happen".

Of course, and you are asserting it didn't happen. The burden lies also with you.

NO I AM NOT.
Go ahead, quote me.
Can't find it?

Only one of us has an assertion here. I don't assert unless I can prove, because I don't believe unless I SEE proof.

You are making the contrary argument, Pogo.

You and I both know how to glean information from inferences. And you inferred from the initial quote in this chain that cheating didn't occur.

I would appreciate it if you didn't insult my intelligence.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Didn't say they do.

Then why do we keep voting for these people?

Because the Duopoly has a stranglehold and they give us a choice between "Bad" and "Worse", ergo the only way to prevent the latter is the former.

Then our republic/democracy is effectively dead.

Aye, but that's not new.

Then the question remains, why do we continue perpetrating this farce?

 

[TemplarKormac]

I don't assert unless I can prove, because I don't believe unless I SEE proof.

Like I said, Giuliani held hearings on the matter, evidence was presented by dozens (if not tens of dozens) of witnesses who were at or near the polling sites in question where the alleged misbehavior took place. I saw it. I watched hours and hours of it. I read transcripts.

I didn't make this assertion without any evidence to back it up. IE, I didn't pull this assertion out of my ass.

Oh look! A squirrel!

 

[mamooth]

Like I said, Giuliani held hearings on the matter, evidence was presented by dozens (if not tens of dozens) of witnesses who were at or near the polling sites in question where the alleged misbehavior took place. I saw it. I watched hours and hours of it. I read transcripts.

And that testimony was judged to show no evidence of any fraud.

I didn't make this assertion without any evidence to back it up.

People also provide evidence for alien abduction. It's just worthless evidence that sucks. You don't have is any good evidence that backs up your conspiracy theory, therefore you're treated the same way as someone claiming alien abductions are real.

 

[TemplarKormac]

And that testimony was judged to show no evidence of any fraud.

Unless the merits of these testimonies were tested, which they weren't, I would wager you are talking out of your backside.

Tell me, were the merits of these accusations tested or were they not? Or do you simply view dismissal of a case brought as "no evidence of any fraud"?

People also provide evidence for alien abduction. It's just worthless evidence that sucks.

Curious, did you even take time to judge the evidence for yourself? Or am I expecting too much of you?

You analogy is flawed.

 

[mamooth]

Unless the merits of these testimonies were tested, which they weren't, I would wager you are talking out of your backside.

Well, if you're not talking out of your backside, you'll be able to provide us with some truly compelling testimony. Please proceed.

Curious, did you even take time to judge the evidence for yourself? Or am I expecting too much of you?

This will be where you find an excuse to not provide the evidence you claim to have. We know what to expect from you.

 

[Pogo]

That is, unless you of all people have suddenly come up with some kind of evidence of "cheating". Which, if so, why did you hold out until now?

The absence of evidence does not imply evidence is absent.

--- and the burden of proof lies with the asserter. Check your post.

"It coulda happened" is not the same as "it did happen".

Of course, and you are asserting it didn't happen. The burden lies also with you.

NO I AM NOT.
Go ahead, quote me.
Can't find it?

Only one of us has an assertion here. I don't assert unless I can prove, because I don't believe unless I SEE proof.

You are making the contrary argument, Pogo.

You and I both know how to glean information from inferences. And you inferred from the initial quote in this chain that cheating didn't occur.

I would appreciate it if you didn't insult my intelligence.

NO, I made no argument. I prevented you from making one you can't sustain.
I made ZERO claim of a negative. Go ahead, quote where I did.
Btw I can't 'infer' in that moment. Only you can do that.

 

[Pogo]

Didn't say they do.

Then why do we keep voting for these people?

Because the Duopoly has a stranglehold and they give us a choice between "Bad" and "Worse", ergo the only way to prevent the latter is the former.

Then our republic/democracy is effectively dead.

Aye, but that's not new.

Then the question remains, why do we continue perpetrating this farce?

Mainly because Electoral College. Coupla the guys an' me, we're gonna tear that mofugga down. You in or what?

 

[ElmerMudd]

Presidential concession speeches show the strength of our democracy and the character of our leaders. Every elections is hard fought but every losing candidate has given a concession speech to help bring the nation back together. That does not mean a stop fighting for the issues they campaigned on. They will within the frame work of our great country. Hillary gave a concession speech 2 days after the completion of the 2016 election. McCain, Romney, George Bush senior on and on . Trump shows he put's himself above our country unlike any other Presidential candidate. He is an embarrassment along with all that support him in calling the 2020 election a fraud. Trump called the 2016 election as rigged until he won.

Trump is proving he has no character but our democracy shows it's strength. Our trued and tried government has blocked all of his attempts to overturn the election.

Bob Dole was funny, John McCain was sincere: Here's how presidential candidates have conceded over the years

Some concession speeches have used humor, others have been sincere. One candidate even had to concede twice in the same cycle.

www.usatoday.com

John McCain was a crook and habitual liar-to call him sincere is just ignorant.

turdle has no character and would not know character if it bit him on the

Presidential concession speeches show the strength of our democracy and the character of our leaders. Every elections is hard fought but every losing candidate has given a concession speech to help bring the nation back together. That does not mean a stop fighting for the issues they campaigned on. They will within the frame work of our great country. Hillary gave a concession speech 2 days after the completion of the 2016 election. McCain, Romney, George Bush senior on and on . Trump shows he put's himself above our country unlike any other Presidential candidate. He is an embarrassment along with all that support him in calling the 2020 election a fraud. Trump called the 2016 election as rigged until he won.

Trump is proving he has no character but our democracy shows it's strength. Our trued and tried government has blocked all of his attempts to overturn the election.

Bob Dole was funny, John McCain was sincere: Here's how presidential candidates have conceded over the years

Some concession speeches have used humor, others have been sincere. One candidate even had to concede twice in the same cycle.

www.usatoday.com

Hunter biden has real character smoking crack and playing with ugly chinks naked

ass

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Presidential concession speeches show the strength of our democracy and the character of our leaders. Every elections is hard fought but every losing candidate has given a concession speech to help bring the nation back together. That does not mean a stop fighting for the issues they campaigned on. They will within the frame work of our great country. Hillary gave a concession speech 2 days after the completion of the 2016 election. McCain, Romney, George Bush senior on and on . Trump shows he put's himself above our country unlike any other Presidential candidate. He is an embarrassment along with all that support him in calling the 2020 election a fraud. Trump called the 2016 election as rigged until he won.

Trump is proving he has no character but our democracy shows it's strength. Our trued and tried government has blocked all of his attempts to overturn the election.

Bob Dole was funny, John McCain was sincere: Here's how presidential candidates have conceded over the years

Some concession speeches have used humor, others have been sincere. One candidate even had to concede twice in the same cycle.

www.usatoday.com

You're right.

Biden should show some true character and concede.

 

[wamose]

There is no reason for concession speeches when the election was totally corrupt. Only a loser would concede an election that was stolen from them. This election will never be official.

I'd probably concede even if I thought I lost an unfair election. The only thing I'd have to gain by not doing so is looking like a jerk. Maybe I'm just a loser.

Accepting corruption doesn't do anyone any good. It's especially bad for our system of government when it has left so many millions of people thinking their vote is meaningless and their government doesn't represent them. Personally, I have no illusions that this government will ever do what's right for the people.

 

[TemplarKormac]

That is, unless you of all people have suddenly come up with some kind of evidence of "cheating". Which, if so, why did you hold out until now?

The absence of evidence does not imply evidence is absent.

--- and the burden of proof lies with the asserter. Check your post.

"It coulda happened" is not the same as "it did happen".

Of course, and you are asserting it didn't happen. The burden lies also with you.

NO I AM NOT.
Go ahead, quote me.
Can't find it?

Only one of us has an assertion here. I don't assert unless I can prove, because I don't believe unless I SEE proof.

You are making the contrary argument, Pogo.

You and I both know how to glean information from inferences. And you inferred from the initial quote in this chain that cheating didn't occur.

I would appreciate it if you didn't insult my intelligence.

NO, I made no argument. I prevented you from making one you can't sustain.
I made ZERO claim of a negative. Go ahead, quote where I did.
Btw I can't 'infer' in that moment. Only you can do that.

Your contortions and mental gymnastics are duly noted.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Didn't say they do.

Then why do we keep voting for these people?

Because the Duopoly has a stranglehold and they give us a choice between "Bad" and "Worse", ergo the only way to prevent the latter is the former.

Then our republic/democracy is effectively dead.

Aye, but that's not new.

Then the question remains, why do we continue perpetrating this farce?

Mainly because Electoral College. Coupla the guys an' me, we're gonna tear that mofugga down. You in or what?

Bruh. My cousin Cleetus had a degree in arithmetic from the Electoral College. Only knows how to count to 538 though.