Fraud or no fraud? that is the question...

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

34 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Any hand wringing has nothing to do with Trump's chance of winning. That is zero.

 

The concern is the damage he is doing to America's credibility for no reason than being a sore loser. Like everything else he has done in his life, personal and professional, he will destroy something rather than allow anyone else to enjoy or profit from it. Now he is attacking our own institutions and the droves of dummies who follow him are eating it up.

Again, I’m always amazed at the level emotional angst of some of you folks.  You can sit and watch a Tom Clancy novel play out over 4 years, be led along by your collective noses with tales of bed sheets stained by urine and clandestine meetings in plain sight in Trump freaking tower, only to be left home alone, desperate and dateless when the entire scandal breaks apart and Reinreich Mueller exposed as a guy long past his prime.... and see no problem with it.  No stains on the institution, no problems with our reputation abroad, just a bunch of dummies who got skitched for 4 long years shouting RUSSIA in shrill English. 
 

On the other hand, pursuing lawful recourse breaks the whole damn thing apart in 30 days?  
 

It’s laughable. 

33 minutes ago, Scraps said:

 

 

What evidence has been submitted?  And if you admit that there is a lack thereof, is there anything to consider?

 

It just keeps coming back to the same conclusion.  Trump lost.

I admitted nothing, Comrade.  I simply acknowledged your feelings as yours and moved on.  
 

Again, though, if you’re right, what’s the problem?  

[DrDawkinstein]

1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Again, I’m always amazed at the level emotional angst of some of you folks.  You can sit and watch a Tom Clancy novel play out over 4 years, be led along by your collective noses with tales of bed sheets stained by urine and clandestine meetings in plain sight in Trump freaking tower, only to be left home alone, desperate and dateless when the entire scandal breaks apart and Reinreich Mueller exposed as a guy long past his prime.... and see no problem with it.  No stains on the institution, no problems with our reputation abroad, just a bunch of dummies who got skitched for 4 long years shouting RUSSIA in shrill English. 
 

On the other hand, pursuing lawful recourse breaks the whole damn thing apart in 30 days?  
 

It’s laughable. 

 

No, not 30 days. He's been doing it for over 4 years. Ever since "Russia, if you are listening". Ever since he stood at the podium on a global stage and chose to side with Putin over our own Intelligence Agencies. I could hit TBD's character limit making a list of "Ever since"s.

[Warcodered]

3 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

No, not 30 days. He's been doing it for over 4 years. Ever since "Russia, if you are listening". Ever since he stood at the podium on a global stage and chose to side with Putin over our own Intelligence Agencies. I could hit TBD's character limit making a list of "Ever since"s.

I mean he said he would of won the popular vote in 2016 if it wasn't for illegal votes and then promptly does nothing about it for the next 4 years. I mean you'd think that'd of been important for him if he wanted to get re-elected. It's almost as if he's just completely full of *****.

Edited December 7, 2020 by Warcodered

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

32 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

Got it right here

Just as soon as someone gives me something to put in it.

Has pretending Trump isn't a narcissist damaged you're perception of what the word means? 

I’m not the grammar police, I type quickly and auto correct rat f***s the best of us.  That said, I’m not sure what your query is. 
 

Are you suggesting that I am under the illusion that DJT does not have narcissistic tendencies?  I’ve never suggested that, nor do I believe that.  I think it’s a job requirement at Senate level and above.  
 

Since the question of pretending appears to be projection on your part, I’ll assume we just move on.  

[DrDawkinstein]

2 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

I mean he said he would of won the popular vote in 2016 if it wasn't for illegal votes and then promptly does nothing about it for the next 4 years. I mean you'd think that'd of been important for him if he wanted to get re-elected. It's almost as if he's just completely full of *****.

 

Well, to be fair, they did do a large investigation into said "fraud", and it turned up the same amount of evidence they are finding in 2020. Zero.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

3 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

No, not 30 days. He's been doing it for over 4 years. Ever since "Russia, if you are listening". Ever since he stood at the podium on a global stage and chose to side with Putin over our own Intelligence Agencies. I could hit TBD's character limit making a list of "Ever since"s.

Ah, so you’re still on the Russia Ride.  I applaud your perseverance and seeing it through past the point where Heidreich Mueller und his gang of 12 tapped out.

 

So, so much hand wringing. 

 

 

[Warcodered]

Just now, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Well, to be fair, they did do a large investigation into said "fraud", and it turned up the same amount of evidence they are finding in 2020. Zero.

I know it's just amazing to me that he purports that there were millions of fraudulent votes in the election he just happened to win anyway and that is not his number 1 priority. It was something that happened in the background and was quietly smothered with a pillow.

1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Ah, so you’re still on the Russia Ride.  I applaud your perseverance and seeing it through past the point where Heidreich Mueller und his gang of 12 tapped out.

 

So, so much hand wringing. 

 

 

It's no ones fault but your own if the only thing you took from the Mueller report was Barr's memo.

[DrDawkinstein]

2 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

I know it's just amazing to me that he purports that there were millions of fraudulent votes in the election he just happened to win anyway and that is not his number 1 priority. It was something that happened in the background and was quietly smothered with a pillow.

 

It's not so much that Trump and the GOP did nothing to secure they election. It's that they actively worked against it for the LAST FOUR YEARS. Because this is by design.

 

https://apnews.com/article/693436f36ca04995bf66f07bd4d7b4e4

 

Quote

...Democrats have tried to pass several election security bills in recent weeks only to have them blocked by Republicans, who say they are partisan or unnecessary....

 

Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Democratic candidate for president, has introduced legislation to require states to use paper ballots, which would make election systems less vulnerable to hacking...Republicans blocked passage of Klobuchar’s bill on the Senate floor in June.

 

 

 

[Scraps]

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

I admitted nothing, Comrade.  I simply acknowledged your feelings as yours and moved on.  
 

Again, though, if you’re right, what’s the problem?  

 

I will ask again, what evidence?

 

The problem is that elections are the backbone of a democracy.  When you call into question the very basis the republic is built upon with no substantive reason, you are damaging the republic.  Trump's only reason for doing this is to damage Biden's presidency and to fleece his supporters wallets.  Either that or his is insane.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

18 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

I know it's just amazing to me that he purports that there were millions of fraudulent votes in the election he just happened to win anyway and that is not his number 1 priority. It was something that happened in the background and was quietly smothered with a pillow.

It's no ones fault but your own if the only thing you took from the Mueller report was Barr's memo.

Well..Thank You? 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

19 minutes ago, Scraps said:

 

I will ask again, what evidence?

 

The problem is that elections are the backbone of a democracy.  When you call into question the very basis the republic is built upon with no substantive reason, you are damaging the republic.  Trump's only reason for doing this is to damage Biden's presidency and to fleece his supporters wallets.  Either that or his is insane.

Again, at the risk of appearing rude, the question of evidence or lack thereof is best answered by you.  I don’t care one way or the other what you think or feel.  That’s the beauty of being an American.  
 

As for damaging the republic, I have a few thoughts on that.  First, the republic is strong enough to withstand legal challenges that come with results a candidate chooses to bring.  We saw that with Gore v The Republic, which ended the way it started.   We saw that with Trump = Russia and all that nonsense the suckers drank in, going from “Treason!” to “If not treason then obstruction of justice in defending himself against baseless accusations!”.  We saw that with Clinton’s impeachment, with the phony Trump impeachment and the Mike Flynn debacle.  We saw it with the assault on decency and the SC in the Kavanaugh gearing, and the republic marched on.  
 

Now that said, there is a part of me that recognizes the brilliance of the “destroy Trump at every turn” strategy employed by the liberals for 5 years.  They’ve tossed everything at him and you—the faithful— gobble it up like a Lewinsky on a presidential staff.  Trump, to you folks, is everything someone could possibly be...liar cheater homophobe misogynist islamaphobe Xenophobe racist sexist Russian spy and so on.  You buy it all, and while that doesn’t make you bad husbands, fathers or sons or daughters, it does make you almost impossibly gullible.  We’ve got @oldmanfan lamenting his wicked life before coming to Jesus in the form of Biden like  it matters at all.  
 

Anyway, understanding how emotionally pliable you sorry bastards are, they ran gamut after gamut and guess what—it worked.  You voted in large numbers for a guy who eats his pudding through a straw and often has no idea who he ran against.  Again, old man fan brags about voting for a ham Sammy over Trump and guess what—mission accomplished, he did. 
 

So, let’s even assume the goal is to destroy the confidence  in our system and vilify the opponent in an attempt to prevail in the next election.   Honestly, it seems like it was a very effective strategy employed by the Dems for 4 solid years.  Trump supporters used to joke “Ah, this time you got him!” when yet another dem dirty truck campaign was introduced.  On some level you have to acknowledge that for the libs, hatred sells and it resulted in a creepy old man being announced king.   Maybe that is the strategy when all is said and done? 
 

 

[Warcodered]

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

Now that said, there is a part of me that recognizes the brilliance of the “destroy Trump at every turn” strategy employed by the liberals for 5 years.  They’ve tossed everything at him and you—the faithful— gobble it up like a Lewinsky on a presidential staff.  Trump, to you folks, is everything someone could possibly be...liar cheater homophobe misogynist islamaphobe Xenophobe racist sexist Russian spy and so on.  You buy it all, and while that doesn’t make you bad husbands, fathers or sons or daughters, it does make you almost impossibly gullible.  We’ve got @oldmanfan lamenting his wicked life before coming to Jesus in the form of Biden like  it matters at all.  

You could basically swap Trump for Clinton in this and tweak it a bit and get what happened in the run up to the 2016 election. I mean you could say all those Benghazi hearings were a massive waste of money since they didn't find anything but Republicans got what they wanted. The rest of your post just seems like a bunch of inane ramblings of someone trying to justify their falling for the grift from one of the most prolific liars to ever be President.

[shoshin]

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

Again, at the risk of appearing rude, the question of evidence or lack thereof is best answered by you.  I don’t care one way or the other what you think or feel.  That’s the beauty of being an American.  
 

As for damaging the republic, I have a few thoughts on that.  First, the republic is strong enough to withstand legal challenges that come with results a candidate chooses to bring.  We saw that with Gore v The Republic, which ended the way it started.   We saw that with Trump = Russia and all that nonsense the suckers drank in, going from “Treason!” to “If not treason then obstruction of justice in defending himself against baseless accusations!”.  We saw that with Clinton’s impeachment, with the phony Trump impeachment and the Mike Flynn debacle.  We saw it with the assault on decency and the SC in the Kavanaugh gearing, and the republic marched on.  
 

Now that said, there is a part of me that recognizes the brilliance of the “destroy Trump at every turn” strategy employed by the liberals for 5 years.  They’ve tossed everything at him and you—the faithful— gobble it up like a Lewinsky on a presidential staff.  Trump, to you folks, is everything someone could possibly be...liar cheater homophobe misogynist islamaphobe Xenophobe racist sexist Russian spy and so on.  You buy it all, and while that doesn’t make you bad husbands, fathers or sons or daughters, it does make you almost impossibly gullible.  We’ve got @oldmanfan lamenting his wicked life before coming to Jesus in the form of Biden like  it matters at all.  
 

Anyway, understanding how emotionally pliable you sorry bastards are, they ran gamut after gamut and guess what—it worked.  You voted in large numbers for a guy who eats his pudding through a straw and often has no idea who he ran against.  Again, old man fan brags about voting for a ham Sammy over Trump and guess what—mission accomplished, he did. 
 

So, let’s even assume the goal is to destroy the confidence  in our system and vilify the opponent in an attempt to prevail in the next election.   Honestly, it seems like it was a very effective strategy employed by the Dems for 4 solid years.  Trump supporters used to joke “Ah, this time you got him!” when yet another dem dirty truck campaign was introduced.  On some level you have to acknowledge that for the libs, hatred sells and it resulted in a creepy old man being announced king.   Maybe that is the strategy when all is said and done? 
 

 

 

Are you back to name calling and stereotypes? If you can't be civil here, why not just stay at the other place? 

[Scraps]

On 12/7/2020 at 5:19 PM, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Again, at the risk of appearing rude, the question of evidence or lack thereof is best answered by you.  I don’t care one way or the other what you think or feel.  That’s the beauty of being an American. 

 

If you believe there is evidence, I am asking you to provide said evidence.  The fact that you can't do so speaks volumes.

 

On 12/7/2020 at 5:19 PM, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

As for damaging the republic, I have a few thoughts on that.  First, the republic is strong enough to withstand legal challenges that come with results a candidate chooses to bring.  We saw that with Gore v The Republic, which ended the way it started.  

 

Bush vs Gore involved 1 state and 537 votes.  Given the exceedingly slim margin, (0.009%) recounts were reasonable.  At the end, Gore did what was good for the country and conceded, graciously, with a call for unity.  Trump has to flip multiple states. Trump lost all these by far greater margins than Gore did in Florida in 2000, hasn't produced any evidence that any judge found remotely convincing and every recount has reaffirmed the original result.  Trump lost.  Never did Gore remotely suggest that the voters in entire cities or entire states should be disenfranchised and the election thrown to state legislators.  There is a wide chasm between these two cases.

Edited December 9, 2020 by Scraps

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

35 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

You could basically swap Trump for Clinton in this and tweak it a bit and get what happened in the run up to the 2016 election. I mean you could say all those Benghazi hearings were a massive waste of money since they didn't find anything but Republicans got what they wanted. The rest of your post just seems like a bunch of inane ramblings of someone trying to justify their falling for the grift from one of the most prolific liars to ever be President.

I would not expect you to be able to dial in, you’re emotionally stunted.  Other than that carry on. 

[Warcodered]

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

I would not expect you to be able to dial in, you’re emotionally stunted.  Other than that carry on. 

 

44 minutes ago, shoshin said:

 

Are you back to name calling and stereotypes? If you can't be civil here, why not just stay at the other place? 

Looks like it.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

59 minutes ago, shoshin said:

 

Are you back to name calling and stereotypes? If you can't be civil here, why not just stay at the other place? 

Shoshy, When I feel I’m being attacked, I respond in the nicest way I can.  I understand if you think it’s me—because I certainly can understand supporting the use of legal system as being seen as edgy, conspiracy minded etc.  

 

Again, if you’re playing hall monitor, spread it around.  

 

 

59 minutes ago, Scraps said:

 

If you believe there is evidence, I am asking you to provide said evidence.  The fact that you can't do so speaks volumes.

 

 

Bush vs Gore involved 1 state and 537 votes.  Given the exceedingly slim margin, (0.009%) recounts were reasonable.  At the end, Gore did what was good for the country and conceded, graciously, with a call for unity.  Trump has to flip multiple states. Trump lost all these by far greater margins than Gore did in Florida in 2000, hasn't produced any evidence that any judge found remotely convincing and every recount has reaffirmed the original result.  Trump lost.  Never did Gore remotely suggest that the voters in entire cities or entire state should be disenfranchised and the election thrown to state legislators.  There is a wide chasm between these two cases.

See again... you paint Gore as some heroic figure. He wasn’t, he was a partisan looking to overturn the election.    He lost the election.  It was done.  He chose to try a Hail Mary and swing for the fences. He lost because his argument was weak, regardless of it was 537 votes or 57,370.  He lost because he was wrong...and still the Republic survived.
 

That was a long time ago, and these last 4 years changed everything.  
 

The only chasm is what you personally choose to see.  

 
 

 

[Scraps]

1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

See again... you paint Gore as some heroic figure.

 

Again?  Where did I ever paint Gore as some heroic figure before?

 

1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

He wasn’t, he was a partisan looking to overturn the election.    He lost the election.  It was done.  He chose to try a Hail Mary and swing for the fences. He lost because his argument was weak, regardless of it was 537 votes or 57,370.  He lost because he was wrong...and still the Republic survived

 

What does that say about Trump?  Gore was behind by 1784 votes on election night.  The margin was so close that it generated an automatic recounts and the margin dropped to 327.  If that was a Hail Mary or swinging for the fences,  Trump must be trying to jump the Pacific on a Harley.  Oh wait, the cancel culturalist in chief canceled Harley Davidson, a Confederate suites him better.  Trump is behind by 10,457 in Arizona, 11,779 in Georgia, 154,188 in Michigan, 33,596 in Nevada, 81,660 in Pennsylvania and 20,682 in Wisconsin..  He lost by larger margins than he Hillary in 2016.  Recounts have reaffirmed Trumps losses.  He has taken the extraordinary step of asking courts to disenfranchise cities and legislatures to set aside the vote and seat electors for him.  Gore came nowhere close to anything like that undemocratic behavior.

 

Let's face it, Trump  is a partisan looking to overturn the election.  He lost the election.  It is done.  He lost because his argument is weak, regardless of it was 11,779 votes or 7,061,839.  He lost because he is wrong.

[shoshin]

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

Shoshy, When I feel I’m being attacked, I respond in the nicest way I can.  I understand if you think it’s me—because I certainly can understand supporting the use of legal system as being seen as edgy, conspiracy minded etc.  

 

Again, if you’re playing hall monitor, spread it around.  
 

 

You control you. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

3 hours ago, Scraps said:

 

Again?  Where did I ever paint Gore as some heroic figure before?

 

 

What does that say about Trump?  Gore was behind by 1784 votes on election night.  The margin was so close that it generated an automatic recounts and the margin dropped to 327.  If that was a Hail Mary or swinging for the fences,  Trump must be trying to jump the Pacific on a Harley.  Oh wait, the cancel culturalist in chief canceled Harley Davidson, a Confederate suites him better.  Trump is behind by 10,457 in Arizona, 11,779 in Georgia, 154,188 in Michigan, 33,596 in Nevada, 81,660 in Pennsylvania and 20,682 in Wisconsin..  He lost by larger margins than he Hillary in 2016.  Recounts have reaffirmed Trumps losses.  He has taken the extraordinary step of asking courts to disenfranchise cities and legislatures to set aside the vote and seat electors for him.  Gore came nowhere close to anything like that undemocratic behavior.

 

Let's face it, Trump  is a partisan looking to overturn the election.  He lost the election.  It is done.  He lost because his argument is weak, regardless of it was 11,779 votes or 7,061,839.  He lost because he is wrong.

You’re boring me cheese whiz.  Bills won tonight and all is right in the world.  We’ll argue tomorrow.  Peace, 

2 hours ago, shoshin said:

You control you. 

Of course I do.  I’m comfortable with my replies.