Trump decides the election is "rigged"

[occupied]

If I'm not elected...I will be ...but if i'm not...It will be because of the riggers....they're horrible ... horrible... disgusting people these riggers...screw up everything we try to do... if you elect me...the bestest candidate ever....I promise to do something about the riggers....deport them or something....because they really are terrible people.....disgusting.....But hey I'll win in spite of the riggers...but if I don't it's them not me......never me.

 

[WaitingFor2020]

Now that it's clear Donald Trump is losing, Mr. Trump has taken to attacking the election process itself. Although the election is nearly 3 months away "The Donald" has decided the entire electoral process, which has elected just as many Republicans as Democrats is "rigged against him" Donald Trump has no evidence of this whatsoever, nor has he made an effort to produce any. The general election in America is the most closely watched election in the world. The amount of verified voter fraud is less than 1/10th of 1%, Still, legions of his followers have blindly chosen to believe this nonsense rather than to find out for themselves. Maybe Republicans really are THAT dumb.


Donald Trump is wrong. Rigging an election is almost impossible.

Well, it wasn't impossible for the Democratic leadership to rig the nomination process to cheat Sanders out of a fair shot at the nomination, and one of the very important ways the leadership rigged the nomination process was to limit the debates. They did this because they know Hillary is a poor debater. In fact, after each debate during the primaries, Sanders gained on her. Since the Democratic leadership, which would include Obama, had already decided to give the nomination to Clinton, it makes sense that even months ago, regardless of who won the Republican nomination, they would want to protect Clinton from being humiliated in the debates, so it is not difficult to believe they pushed the networks to schedule the debates at times when there would be low viewership.

It is not rigged to the extent the Democratic leadership rigged the nomination process, but we have seen in other countries when the government flexes its muscles to influence the media, it can have a powerful effect on the outcome of an election.

We are the only country in the world where the government has no control of the media, care to explain the mechanism whereby our government may use the media to unfairly influence our election?

We are the only country in the world where the government has no control of the media, care to explain the mechanism whereby our government may use the media to unfairly influence our election?

I agree 100%, but please, don't write things like this. Republicans have a hard time thinking outside the little box of right wing sound bites. You'll just confuse them.

Well, actually Mr. Bill, I think the government does exercise some control over our press. It is certainly by no means a pure situation. This was ever so clear during the invasion of Iraq when the press sanitized the "Shock and Awe" footage.

 

[jknowgood]

View attachment 84588

In response to your meme, Mr, Jknow, Mr. Trump crushed 16 people who were widely despised by their very own constituents and party members. Let's be precise.

Not really my first choice was Carson, he would've been a great president. Trump came out and gave liberals a taste of their own medicine, and it was great to witness. Just like when Trump crushes Hillary in the debates. Especially if he makes her lose her temper, and shows you the ***** she is.

 

[occupied]

Now that it's clear Donald Trump is losing, Mr. Trump has taken to attacking the election process itself. Although the election is nearly 3 months away "The Donald" has decided the entire electoral process, which has elected just as many Republicans as Democrats is "rigged against him" Donald Trump has no evidence of this whatsoever, nor has he made an effort to produce any. The general election in America is the most closely watched election in the world. The amount of verified voter fraud is less than 1/10th of 1%, Still, legions of his followers have blindly chosen to believe this nonsense rather than to find out for themselves. Maybe Republicans really are THAT dumb.


Donald Trump is wrong. Rigging an election is almost impossible.

Well, it wasn't impossible for the Democratic leadership to rig the nomination process to cheat Sanders out of a fair shot at the nomination, and one of the very important ways the leadership rigged the nomination process was to limit the debates. They did this because they know Hillary is a poor debater. In fact, after each debate during the primaries, Sanders gained on her. Since the Democratic leadership, which would include Obama, had already decided to give the nomination to Clinton, it makes sense that even months ago, regardless of who won the Republican nomination, they would want to protect Clinton from being humiliated in the debates, so it is not difficult to believe they pushed the networks to schedule the debates at times when there would be low viewership.

It is not rigged to the extent the Democratic leadership rigged the nomination process, but we have seen in other countries when the government flexes its muscles to influence the media, it can have a powerful effect on the outcome of an election.

We are the only country in the world where the government has no control of the media, care to explain the mechanism whereby our government may use the media to unfairly influence our election?

I just did. The Democratic leadership which has the support of the WH can suggest a tit for tat arrangement by which a network can get more access - or less if they don't comply - if the debates are scheduled at times of expected low viewership to save Clinton from again being humiliated by her poor debating skills.

Pretty thin. If the candidates are interesting, people will tune in to a debate no matter what time it is on. Besides, We have youtube, it's not like every person in country has only one opportunity to watch the debates.

 

[toomuchtime_]

If I'm not elected...I will be ...but if i'm not...It will be because of the riggers....they're horrible ... horrible... disgusting people these riggers...screw up everything we try to do... if you elect me...the bestest candidate ever....I promise to do something about the riggers....deport them or something....because they really are terrible people.....disgusting.....But hey I'll win in spite of the riggers...but if I don't it's them not me......never me.

Let's keep in mind that while Trump won the Republican nomination, Clinton was awarded the nomination by the Democratic leadership in a rigged nomination process. If you know anything about the history of the party, you know that super delegates were introduced into the primary process after McGovern won the nomination in 1972 despite the opposition of the party leaders and was promptly crushed. To prevent this from ever happening again, the party invented super delegates who are party leaders free to vote for anyone. If there had been no super delegates and more debates, Sanders would have won the nomination. It is clear that words like democracy and ethics have no place in the vocabularies of the leaders of the Democratic Party.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I can't think of anything better than Trump losing and his cult all believing that the election was rigged.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Now that it's clear Donald Trump is losing, Mr. Trump has taken to attacking the election process itself. Although the election is nearly 3 months away "The Donald" has decided the entire electoral process, which has elected just as many Republicans as Democrats is "rigged against him" Donald Trump has no evidence of this whatsoever, nor has he made an effort to produce any. The general election in America is the most closely watched election in the world. The amount of verified voter fraud is less than 1/10th of 1%, Still, legions of his followers have blindly chosen to believe this nonsense rather than to find out for themselves. Maybe Republicans really are THAT dumb.


Donald Trump is wrong. Rigging an election is almost impossible.

Have Leftists forgotten Bush vs Gore 2000?

Sore Loserman, GWB stole the election, Florida recount, hanging chads?

 

[occupied]

If I'm not elected...I will be ...but if i'm not...It will be because of the riggers....they're horrible ... horrible... disgusting people these riggers...screw up everything we try to do... if you elect me...the bestest candidate ever....I promise to do something about the riggers....deport them or something....because they really are terrible people.....disgusting.....But hey I'll win in spite of the riggers...but if I don't it's them not me......never me.

Let's keep in mind that while Trump won the Republican nomination, Clinton was awarded the nomination by the Democratic leadership in a rigged nomination process. If you know anything about the history of the party, you know that super delegates were introduced into the primary process after McGovern won the nomination in 1972 despite the opposition of the party leaders and was promptly crushed. To prevent this from ever happening again, the party invented super delegates who are party leaders free to vote for anyone. If there had been no super delegates and more debates, Sanders would have won the nomination. It is clear that words like democracy and ethics have no place in the vocabularies of the leaders of the Democratic Party.

I am very well aware of what happened and I have not forgotten or forgiven anything but the only thing to do now is make sure Trump does not win. The lesser of two evils for sure but it's what we ended up with. I cannot imagine any issues driven progressive being so mad that they vote for Trump out of spite yet that seems to be the argument you are attempting.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

I can't think of anything better than Trump losing and his cult all believing that the election was rigged.

What like the 2000 Presidential Election? The one that Leftists still insist GWB stole off that nutball Al Gore?

 

[Auld Phart]

Now that it's clear Donald Trump is losing, Mr. Trump has taken to attacking the election process itself. Although the election is nearly 3 months away "The Donald" has decided the entire electoral process, which has elected just as many Republicans as Democrats is "rigged against him" Donald Trump has no evidence of this whatsoever, nor has he made an effort to produce any. The general election in America is the most closely watched election in the world. The amount of verified voter fraud is less than 1/10th of 1%, Still, legions of his followers have blindly chosen to believe this nonsense rather than to find out for themselves. Maybe Republicans really are THAT dumb.


Donald Trump is wrong. Rigging an election is almost impossible.

Have Leftists forgotten Bush vs Gore 2000?

Sore Loserman, GWB stole the election, Florida recount, hanging chads?

If democrats win, it's not cheating

 

[occupied]

I can't think of anything better than Trump losing and his cult all believing that the election was rigged.

What like the 2000 Presidential Election? The one that Leftists still insist GWB stole off that nutball Al Gore?

Nope, the margin of victory will be such that no recount will be needed or even suggested.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Now that it's clear Donald Trump is losing, Mr. Trump has taken to attacking the election process itself. Although the election is nearly 3 months away "The Donald" has decided the entire electoral process, which has elected just as many Republicans as Democrats is "rigged against him" Donald Trump has no evidence of this whatsoever, nor has he made an effort to produce any. The general election in America is the most closely watched election in the world. The amount of verified voter fraud is less than 1/10th of 1%, Still, legions of his followers have blindly chosen to believe this nonsense rather than to find out for themselves. Maybe Republicans really are THAT dumb.


Donald Trump is wrong. Rigging an election is almost impossible.

Well, it wasn't impossible for the Democratic leadership to rig the nomination process to cheat Sanders out of a fair shot at the nomination, and one of the very important ways the leadership rigged the nomination process was to limit the debates. They did this because they know Hillary is a poor debater. In fact, after each debate during the primaries, Sanders gained on her. Since the Democratic leadership, which would include Obama, had already decided to give the nomination to Clinton, it makes sense that even months ago, regardless of who won the Republican nomination, they would want to protect Clinton from being humiliated in the debates, so it is not difficult to believe they pushed the networks to schedule the debates at times when there would be low viewership.

It is not rigged to the extent the Democratic leadership rigged the nomination process, but we have seen in other countries when the government flexes its muscles to influence the media, it can have a powerful effect on the outcome of an election.

We are the only country in the world where the government has no control of the media, care to explain the mechanism whereby our government may use the media to unfairly influence our election?

I just did. The Democratic leadership which has the support of the WH can suggest a tit for tat arrangement by which a network can get more access - or less if they don't comply - if the debates are scheduled at times of expected low viewership to save Clinton from again being humiliated by her poor debating skills.

Pretty thin. If the candidates are interesting, people will tune in to a debate no matter what time it is on. Besides, We have youtube, it's not like every person in country has only one opportunity to watch the debates.

Not at all. Relatively few voters take advantage of all the information about the candidates available on the Internet and most of those who choose to tune into an NFL game instead of the debates will not then search for the debates. Elections are won or lost at the margins, by a few percentage points, so if scheduling the debates opposite NFL games reduces the viewership by only 10%, it will skew the vote in favor of Clinton since she is such a poor debater.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Now that it's clear Donald Trump is losing, Mr. Trump has taken to attacking the election process itself. Although the election is nearly 3 months away "The Donald" has decided the entire electoral process, which has elected just as many Republicans as Democrats is "rigged against him" Donald Trump has no evidence of this whatsoever, nor has he made an effort to produce any. The general election in America is the most closely watched election in the world. The amount of verified voter fraud is less than 1/10th of 1%, Still, legions of his followers have blindly chosen to believe this nonsense rather than to find out for themselves. Maybe Republicans really are THAT dumb.


Donald Trump is wrong. Rigging an election is almost impossible.

Have Leftists forgotten Bush vs Gore 2000?

Sore Loserman, GWB stole the election, Florida recount, hanging chads?

That's why I'm laughing at you people.

 

[JBond]

Now that it's clear Donald Trump is losing, Mr. Trump has taken to attacking the election process itself. Although the election is nearly 3 months away "The Donald" has decided the entire electoral process, which has elected just as many Republicans as Democrats is "rigged against him" Donald Trump has no evidence of this whatsoever, nor has he made an effort to produce any. The general election in America is the most closely watched election in the world. The amount of verified voter fraud is less than 1/10th of 1%, Still, legions of his followers have blindly chosen to believe this nonsense rather than to find out for themselves. Maybe Republicans really are THAT dumb.


Donald Trump is wrong. Rigging an election is almost impossible.

It is impossible to verify the level of corruption in elections because democrats are too chicken shit to even bother trying. The reason they fight against a free and fair elections process is because they know they are cheating on a large scale. There is not a single meaningful reason to avoid verifying voters. The only possible reason to hide who is voting is to commit fraud.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I can't think of anything better than Trump losing and his cult all believing that the election was rigged.

What like the 2000 Presidential Election? The one that Leftists still insist GWB stole off that nutball Al Gore?

And you agree with those leftists?

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

I can't think of anything better than Trump losing and his cult all believing that the election was rigged.

What like the 2000 Presidential Election? The one that Leftists still insist GWB stole off that nutball Al Gore?

Nope, the margin of victory will be such that no recount will be needed or even suggested.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

I can't think of anything better than Trump losing and his cult all believing that the election was rigged.

What like the 2000 Presidential Election? The one that Leftists still insist GWB stole off that nutball Al Gore?

And you agree with those leftists?

Answer the question.

 

[occupied]

Now that it's clear Donald Trump is losing, Mr. Trump has taken to attacking the election process itself. Although the election is nearly 3 months away "The Donald" has decided the entire electoral process, which has elected just as many Republicans as Democrats is "rigged against him" Donald Trump has no evidence of this whatsoever, nor has he made an effort to produce any. The general election in America is the most closely watched election in the world. The amount of verified voter fraud is less than 1/10th of 1%, Still, legions of his followers have blindly chosen to believe this nonsense rather than to find out for themselves. Maybe Republicans really are THAT dumb.


Donald Trump is wrong. Rigging an election is almost impossible.

Well, it wasn't impossible for the Democratic leadership to rig the nomination process to cheat Sanders out of a fair shot at the nomination, and one of the very important ways the leadership rigged the nomination process was to limit the debates. They did this because they know Hillary is a poor debater. In fact, after each debate during the primaries, Sanders gained on her. Since the Democratic leadership, which would include Obama, had already decided to give the nomination to Clinton, it makes sense that even months ago, regardless of who won the Republican nomination, they would want to protect Clinton from being humiliated in the debates, so it is not difficult to believe they pushed the networks to schedule the debates at times when there would be low viewership.

It is not rigged to the extent the Democratic leadership rigged the nomination process, but we have seen in other countries when the government flexes its muscles to influence the media, it can have a powerful effect on the outcome of an election.

We are the only country in the world where the government has no control of the media, care to explain the mechanism whereby our government may use the media to unfairly influence our election?

I just did. The Democratic leadership which has the support of the WH can suggest a tit for tat arrangement by which a network can get more access - or less if they don't comply - if the debates are scheduled at times of expected low viewership to save Clinton from again being humiliated by her poor debating skills.

Pretty thin. If the candidates are interesting, people will tune in to a debate no matter what time it is on. Besides, We have youtube, it's not like every person in country has only one opportunity to watch the debates.

Not at all. Relatively few voters take advantage of all the information about the candidates available on the Internet and most of those who choose to tune into an NFL game instead of the debates will not then search for the debates. Elections are won or lost at the margins, by a few percentage points, so if scheduling the debates opposite NFL games reduces the viewership by only 10%, it will skew the vote in favor of Clinton since she is such a poor debater.

Youtube and TIVO negate any such manipulation real or imagined. The primaries have always been manipulated and rigged to keep outsiders at bay. In years past the republican party was monolithic enough that the party bosses could just pick who's turn it was so they had no defense against a lousy cult of personality interloper. The republicans dropped the ball on their end and will now pay dearly for it.

 

[toomuchtime_]

If I'm not elected...I will be ...but if i'm not...It will be because of the riggers....they're horrible ... horrible... disgusting people these riggers...screw up everything we try to do... if you elect me...the bestest candidate ever....I promise to do something about the riggers....deport them or something....because they really are terrible people.....disgusting.....But hey I'll win in spite of the riggers...but if I don't it's them not me......never me.

Let's keep in mind that while Trump won the Republican nomination, Clinton was awarded the nomination by the Democratic leadership in a rigged nomination process. If you know anything about the history of the party, you know that super delegates were introduced into the primary process after McGovern won the nomination in 1972 despite the opposition of the party leaders and was promptly crushed. To prevent this from ever happening again, the party invented super delegates who are party leaders free to vote for anyone. If there had been no super delegates and more debates, Sanders would have won the nomination. It is clear that words like democracy and ethics have no place in the vocabularies of the leaders of the Democratic Party.

I am very well aware of what happened and I have not forgotten or forgiven anything but the only thing to do now is make sure Trump does not win. The lesser of two evils for sure but it's what we ended up with. I cannot imagine any issues driven progressive being so mad that they vote for Trump out of spite yet that seems to be the argument you are attempting.

That is not at all what I am saying. What I am saying is that the way the leadership of the Democratic Party rigged the nomination process to cheat Sanders out of the nomination make it clear just how corrupt they are and makes it reasonable to assume they tried to use the influence of the WH to schedule the debates at times of expected low viewership to protect Clinton since she is such a poor debater.

As for Sanders supporters, I agree few will vote for Trump, but perhaps many will stay home on election day as a protest against the corrupt nomination process that gave Clinton the nomination. If you look at the polls, Clinton has a large lead among registered votes but a small lead among likely voters, so decisive wins for Trump at the debates could easily turn the numbers around among those registered votes who are likely to vote. That's why Trump is so angry about the debates being scheduled opposite NFL games.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Well, it wasn't impossible for the Democratic leadership to rig the nomination process to cheat Sanders out of a fair shot at the nomination, and one of the very important ways the leadership rigged the nomination process was to limit the debates. They did this because they know Hillary is a poor debater. In fact, after each debate during the primaries, Sanders gained on her. Since the Democratic leadership, which would include Obama, had already decided to give the nomination to Clinton, it makes sense that even months ago, regardless of who won the Republican nomination, they would want to protect Clinton from being humiliated in the debates, so it is not difficult to believe they pushed the networks to schedule the debates at times when there would be low viewership.

It is not rigged to the extent the Democratic leadership rigged the nomination process, but we have seen in other countries when the government flexes its muscles to influence the media, it can have a powerful effect on the outcome of an election.

We are the only country in the world where the government has no control of the media, care to explain the mechanism whereby our government may use the media to unfairly influence our election?

I just did. The Democratic leadership which has the support of the WH can suggest a tit for tat arrangement by which a network can get more access - or less if they don't comply - if the debates are scheduled at times of expected low viewership to save Clinton from again being humiliated by her poor debating skills.

Pretty thin. If the candidates are interesting, people will tune in to a debate no matter what time it is on. Besides, We have youtube, it's not like every person in country has only one opportunity to watch the debates.

Not at all. Relatively few voters take advantage of all the information about the candidates available on the Internet and most of those who choose to tune into an NFL game instead of the debates will not then search for the debates. Elections are won or lost at the margins, by a few percentage points, so if scheduling the debates opposite NFL games reduces the viewership by only 10%, it will skew the vote in favor of Clinton since she is such a poor debater.

Youtube and TIVO negate any such manipulation real or imagined. The primaries have always been manipulated and rigged to keep outsiders at bay. In years past the republican party was monolithic enough that the party bosses could just pick who's turn it was so they had no defense against a lousy cult of personality interloper. The republicans dropped the ball on their end and will now pay dearly for it.

You seem to be saying you agree the Democrats are trying to rig the general election but you see nothing wrong with that because you believe the Republicans may have done it in the past.