If Trump loses and refuses to leave

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

46 minutes ago, TBBills said:

True and Trump will look even worse and still refuse to accept it. Got to love a guy that doesn't give a ***** about Americans only his name and ego matter 

You believe he’s a Russian agent. You voted for Joe Biden, a man your parents, grandparents and perhaps great grandparents recognized was a boob 45 years ago.  
 

DJT will be fine either way- and your feelings shall be placed in the Feelings Box of 2020. 
 

42 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

No. You're there right now. You're at the destination now, you just refuse to accept it.

 

The reality of the situation to any reasonable person is that Trump was decisively defeated in the election. He's used up his best legal challenges in the early aftermath, and they've all be quickly thrown out of court because they have zero evidence. His lawyers have now mostly quit, and he has very few legal battles outstanding that have any chance of overturning a single vote let alone tens of thousands of votes. 

 

After you've tried 25 lawsuits (like Trump has) with ZERO success, do you really expect the subsequent ones to be any more effective? Are they really going to be anymore compelling to the same type of judges following the same laws?

Does that really sound like something that makes any sense whatsoever?

All you’ve done here is grandstanded, lad.  You’ve offered a narrow world view based on your small view of the world, positioned it as fact and believe you have deftly backed me into a corner. 
 

If the destination has been reached you wouldn’t have to say anything further, yet you did, because you’re wrong. 
 

The “reality” as you see it is nothing of the sort, there are 70m Americans patiently waiting for the answer to so many questions.   
 

His lawyers...simply not true.  He has some of the most vaunted legal minds in the county working on his behalf. 
 

As you said, he has a few legal chances left and for reasons I don’t understand you want him to be able to pursue those challenges.  That’s not the way our system works. 
 

As I said, rest easy.  You’ve already said you know what’s going to happen—it silly to waste your breath on this with me.  
 

 

 

[TBBills]

11 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

You believe he’s a Russian agent. You voted for Joe Biden, a man your parents, grandparents and perhaps great grandparents recognized was a boob 45 years ago.  
 

DJT will be fine either way- and your feelings shall be placed in the Feelings Box of 2020. 

Yea so you're placing your feelings in the Feeling Box of 2020, they have a website for that run by crazy lunatics.

Edited November 18, 2020 by TBBills

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

2 minutes ago, TBBills said:

Yea so you're placing your feelings in the Feeling Box of 2020, they have a website for that run by crazy lunatics.

Everyone’s feelings go in the Feelings Box of 2020, that’s the point of the box. We used to use a Feelings Bag, but with the emotional upheaval over DJT not following then script many demanded he follow,  there been an uptick in submissions.   
 

Btw what’s an example of a non-crazy lunatic? 

[Warcodered]

 

 

[TBBills]

41 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

 

 

This is great stuff, reminds me of this forum.

 

Holy ***** it's DR at 3min in!!!

Westside2 sighting at 5:12

Edited November 18, 2020 by TBBills

[Kemp]

10 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I don’t see it happening. 
 

However, if it’s legal—and I question stories like this intended to rule up low information voters and overly emotional nimrods—-the process would be designed to do exactly the opposite of what you’re suggesting. He would not be overturning the election, he would simply be seeking the appropriate resolution to a hotly contested election.  We’re a nation of laws, and pursuit of a just outcome is reasonable even if you feel it kicks you in the niblets.
 

 Credit to the author though for acknowledging what few here see as true, but what is obvious to the informed—Biden is the media president only at this point.  

It’s going to be an interesting couple weeks. 

 

Would love to have seen your reaction if this was running in the opposite direction.

I doubt it happens, but if it does, there will be rioting like America has never seen before, something Trump and his supporters would love.

Funny to call Biden the media president, but all of the Republicans who won aren't treated similarly. Wonder what the difference is?

Did you think of Trump as the media president the week after he won?

No, you didn't.

7 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

Well and you ain't black.  

 

Brilliant retort by a clearly brilliant individual.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

26 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

Would love to have seen your reaction if this was running in the opposite direction.

I doubt it happens, but if it does, there will be rioting like America has never seen before, something Trump and his supporters would love.

Funny to call Biden the media president, but all of the Republicans who won aren't treated similarly. Wonder what the difference is?

Did you think of Trump as the media president the week after he won?

No, you didn't.

 

Brilliant retort by a clearly brilliant individual.

My reaction would be the same as it is now, the same as it was when Al Gore went to court.  The difference is that as Trump supporter, I’d look at the legal process with concern that it might be successful because just about anything can happen. I’d not be wailing about the end of democracy, the assault on freedom, dictatorships and despots.  On the other hand, I’m not a soft as butter liberal. 
 

As for my suggestion at this time that Biden is the media president, I’m not sure what your beef is with that.  He’s not the president, the media refers to him as the president elect based on their interpretation of the race(s), but he’s yet to be certified and his opponent has contested the race.  So, the media calls him X, what else is he?  Maybe Future President Biden?  Not Yet Certified President Biden?  Soon to be Certified President If Trump Fails Biden?   It’s a media term, applicable at times, not at others. 
 

As for R and D presidents past, you don’t have to wonder...the other side conceded the race because they did not contest it.  
 

Trump/Prom Queen: uncontested/conceded, the race was over

 

Obama/Handsome Nutless Dan:

same 

Obama/McCain same

 

Bush/Kerry same 

 

Bush/Gore: well looky looky:

 

 

Check this out..NYT article from11/27/2000.  Florida had certified W Bush as winner of the state, the only one in doubt, but “VP Gore” contested it, and thus the entire race...and not one reference to “President-Elect” Bush.  https://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/27/politics/gore-lawyers-file-challenges-to-contest-election-results.html

 

I wonder what the difference was THEN?  
 

 

[Warcodered]

16 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I wonder what the difference was THEN?

I don't know maybe that 2000 was a single state by a margin of 537 votes compared to now where its several states by at least 50,000.

 

but yeah other than that totally the same.🙄

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, Warcodered said:

I don't know maybe that 2000 was a single state by a margin of 537 votes compared to now where its several states by at least 50,000.

 

but yeah other than that totally the same.🙄

 

“President-elect” is a ceremonial term. It’s important and descriptive when everyone is in agreement as to who won the election, but at the same time, it doesn’t really mean all that much at all.  For example, if the term President-Elect bestowed upon the honoree all privilege and power of the Presidency, folks on your side would not have to kvetch and moan about Biden being kept out of intelligence briefings.  
 

In 2000, the dispute indeed boiled down to one state and 600 votes when all was said and done.  While true, it’s also true that Florida had certified the election results and declared Bush the winner of the race.  

 

In that sense, and understanding that the phrase means an awful lot to some, but not a heck of a lot to all, W Bush was THE President-Elect as the phrase is commonly used.  Disputed?  Yes.  Contested?  Yes.  Just a regular guy—no.  Had Gore prevailed and the script flipped, he would have been President-Elect and W Bush would have relinquished the imaginary crown.  
 

No, the situations are not “totally the same” nor did I claim they were.  In W Bush’s case, the media often acted as partial arbiter, at least insofar as the commonly accepted standard for an unofficial designation.  In Biden’s case, the rush to coronation was deliberate and fierce. 

 

 

Edited November 19, 2020 by leh-nerd skin-erd

[Big Blitz]

Here we go....

 

 

 

At the top of the fake "Trending" Politics section on Twitter.......its beyond parody at this point 

 

According to Detroit media and other "Journalists."   

 

 

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha

 

 

[Big Blitz]

Wow

 

 

 

[TBBills]

7 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

Wow

 

 

 

Wow what?

7 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

Here we go....

 

 

 

At the top of the fake "Trending" Politics section on Twitter.......its beyond parody at this point 

 

According to Detroit media and other "Journalists."   

 

 

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha

 

 

According to the courts themselves actually... Come on man you are embarrassing yourself.

 

I like when simple minded folks think fraud happened when the courts already ruled against. 

Edited November 19, 2020 by TBBills

[Kemp]

11 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

My reaction would be the same as it is now, the same as it was when Al Gore went to court.  The difference is that as Trump supporter, I’d look at the legal process with concern that it might be successful because just about anything can happen. I’d not be wailing about the end of democracy, the assault on freedom, dictatorships and despots.  On the other hand, I’m not a soft as butter liberal. 
 

As for my suggestion at this time that Biden is the media president, I’m not sure what your beef is with that.  He’s not the president, the media refers to him as the president elect based on their interpretation of the race(s), but he’s yet to be certified and his opponent has contested the race.  So, the media calls him X, what else is he?  Maybe Future President Biden?  Not Yet Certified President Biden?  Soon to be Certified President If Trump Fails Biden?   It’s a media term, applicable at times, not at others. 
 

As for R and D presidents past, you don’t have to wonder...the other side conceded the race because they did not contest it.  
 

Trump/Prom Queen: uncontested/conceded, the race was over

 

Obama/Handsome Nutless Dan:

same 

Obama/McCain same

 

Bush/Kerry same 

 

Bush/Gore: well looky looky:

 

 

Check this out..NYT article from11/27/2000.  Florida had certified W Bush as winner of the state, the only one in doubt, but “VP Gore” contested it, and thus the entire race...and not one reference to “President-Elect” Bush.  https://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/27/politics/gore-lawyers-file-challenges-to-contest-election-results.html

 

I wonder what the difference was THEN?  
 

 

 

The difference then was that it concerned hundreds of votes in one state, not thousands,  not tens of thousands, not hundreds of thousands in multiple states.

 

Gore didn't claim that every state he lost was because it was a crooked election. Gore didn't say before the election that the only way he could lose was if it was rigged.

 

Pretty simple stuff.

 

 

[TBBills]

14 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

The difference then was that it concerned hundreds of votes in one state, not thousands,  not tens of thousands, not hundreds of thousands in multiple states.

 

Gore didn't claim that every state he lost was because it was a crooked election. Gore didn't say before the election that the only way he could lose was if it was rigged.

 

Pretty simple stuff.

 

 

You would think it was simple to understand but they are having a hard time

[Kemp]

17 minutes ago, TBBills said:

You would think it was simple to understand but they are having a hard time

 

Some of them understand and lie.

Some are amazingly stupid.

I can feel sorry for the stupid ones.

The others are pure scum.

Both are a threat to democracy.

[snafu]

1 hour ago, TBBills said:

Wow what?

 

What do you mean “wow what?” 

It is a big deal for the validity of Michigan’s results. Certifying is usually a rubber stamp move. Two people — the people who actually look at the ballots and voting rolls — refused to certify. Have you bothered to ask why besides assuming that this is partisan BS? It may be just that, but failing to certify is a big deal and the two officials may actually have a good reason as to why. 

 

27 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

Some of them understand and lie.

Some are amazingly stupid.

I can feel sorry for the stupid ones.

The others are pure scum.

Both are a threat to democracy.

 

 

Do you assume that the liars, the stupid ones, and the pure scum are only of one political party?

The threat to democracy isn’t ONLY Trump’s actions, is it ALSO the simple minded dismissal of his claims out of hand. 

 

Have you wondered why all the irregularities seem to favor Biden?  Whether there’s enough to overcome the result that has been reported is doubtful.  But does it not make you wonder whether there’s some credibility behind Trump’s claims?  The threat to democracy is the prevention of hearing his claims, the stoppage of an investigation of the claims. 

 

I dont really care care who ultimately prevails. I’m not going to protest in the streets. I just prefer to see whether the electoral machine is actually broken and needs to be repaired. Does that make me stupid or evil?

 

The threat to democracy is just as much people like you who throw out binary choices when you denigrate those who aren’t in lockstep with your beliefs.  It is a threat when the plan is to win at all costs (and perhaps that includes cheating) just because the President has a personality disorder.

 

Looks like you have a “you problem”.

 

 

 

Edited November 19, 2020 by snafu

[Kemp]

7 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

What do you mean “wow what?” 

It is a big deal for the validity of Michigan’s results. Certifying is usually a rubber stamp move. Two people — the people who actually look at the ballots and voting rolls — refused to certify. Have you bothered to ask why besides assuming that this is partisan BS? It may be just that, but failing to certify is a big deal and the two officials may actually have a good reason as to why. 

 

 

 

Do you assume that the liars, the stupid ones, and the pure scum are only of one political party?

 

 

 

No, but in this case, absolutely.

[snafu]

Just now, Kemp said:

 

No, but in this case, absolutely.

 

I edited my post.  Care to reply to that?

[Tiberius]

An attempt to disenfranchise Detroit voters by two Republicans members of the Wayne County, Mich., Board of Canvassers failed Tuesday, thanks in large part to a Zoom conference that allowed the public to observe their antics. Slate’s Ben Mathis-Lilley writes on the episode:

 

“[Board chair Monica Palmer] made something of a misstep by trying to block Detroit’s votes but not those tallied in nearby Livonia, which has a much whiter population, even after it had been noted during the meeting that Livonia’s numbers included the same kinds of small inconsistencies that were purportedly at issue. . . .

For his part, Republican canvassing board member William Hartmann has spent the last decade-plus filling his Facebook account with images of Barack Obama caricatured as a toothless, cigarette-smoking bum and hustler.

Fortunately all of this failed to go over with the members of the public, many of them Black, who spoke directly to Palmer and Hartmann during the comment period before they reversed their position. Palmer and Hartmann were lectured about the vote-counting process and told repeatedly they were embarrassing their state in what was sure to be a losing effort.”

[snafu]

Just now, Tiberius said:

An attempt to disenfranchise Detroit voters by two Republicans members of the Wayne County, Mich., Board of Canvassers failed Tuesday, thanks in large part to a Zoom conference that allowed the public to observe their antics. Slate’s Ben Mathis-Lilley writes on the episode:

 

“[Board chair Monica Palmer] made something of a misstep by trying to block Detroit’s votes but not those tallied in nearby Livonia, which has a much whiter population, even after it had been noted during the meeting that Livonia’s numbers included the same kinds of small inconsistencies that were purportedly at issue. . . .

For his part, Republican canvassing board member William Hartmann has spent the last decade-plus filling his Facebook account with images of Barack Obama caricatured as a toothless, cigarette-smoking bum and hustler.

Fortunately all of this failed to go over with the members of the public, many of them Black, who spoke directly to Palmer and Hartmann during the comment period before they reversed their position. Palmer and Hartmann were lectured about the vote-counting process and told repeatedly they were embarrassing their state in what was sure to be a losing effort.”

 

So attack the messenger and not the message is the reaction.

Maybe there’s something to this Wayne County thing. Just sayin.  If the reason for the failure to certify was BS then why not just report that?