Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    28 Jan '17 15:10
    http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/26/hillary-clinton-received-800000-votes-from-nonciti/

    Already posted in a previous thread, but knowing how the anti-conservatives on here have a penchant for making all manner of accusations and/or denying literally anything which their nemeses put forth, it's worth pointing out that all the fuss, all the bluster about the so-called 'debunked' and 'unsubstantiated' complaints regarding voter fraud def has legs.

    And you guys thought I was just another pretty face!
  2. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    28 Jan '17 15:17
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/26/hillary-clinton-received-800000-votes-from-nonciti/

    Already posted in a previous thread, but knowing how the anti-conservatives on here have a penchant for making all manner of accusations and/or denying literally anything which their nemeses put forth, it's worth pointing out that all the fuss, all the blu ...[text shortened]... ints regarding voter fraud def has legs.

    And you guys thought I was just another pretty face!
    The professor involved in the study asks that you stop pretending it validates anything King Donald I says: https://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/stop-citing-our-work-virginia-professor-says-trumps-twisting-his-research-on-non-citizen-voting/
  3. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    28 Jan '17 15:18
    So, do you support a recount?
    Trumps lawyers argued against a recount on the basis that:
    “All available evidence suggests that the 2016 general election was not tainted by fraud or mistake.”
  4. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    9780
    28 Jan '17 15:22
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    So, do you support a recount?
    Trumps lawyers argued against a recount on the basis that:
    “All available evidence suggests that the 2016 general election was not tainted by fraud or mistake.”
    Checkmate.
  5. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12091
    28 Jan '17 15:28
    I wouldn't mind deporting all yhe illegals and locking up all those who commit voter fraud.

    Is anyone denying the voter fraud?
  6. Standard membershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    56284
    28 Jan '17 16:01
    Originally posted by Eladar
    I wouldn't mind deporting all yhe illegals and locking up all those who commit voter fraud.

    Is anyone denying the voter fraud?
    Well, if there's proof of voter fraud, the election results should stricken and a new election called.
  7. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    28 Jan '17 16:06
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    The professor involved in the study asks that you stop pretending it validates anything King Donald I says: https://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/stop-citing-our-work-virginia-professor-says-trumps-twisting-his-research-on-non-citizen-voting/
    The professor mentioned me by name, did he?

    Instead of straining out the gnat while you greedily gulp down the camel, the question you dodge, i.e., did voter fraud occur, is at least answered with a qualified 'yes.'

    The only remaining issue: what was the full extent of the established voter fraud--- you know, the voter fraud you (and others) insisted didn't happen?

    I have a pro tip for your habitual pants-crapping, which, by this point, must have ruined so many of your trousers: consider switching to Depends® For Men.
    From what I have read, you won't even be able to tell they're on... well, except for the heat of every new misstep.
  8. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    28 Jan '17 16:07
    Originally posted by shavixmir
    Well, if there's proof of voter fraud, the election results should stricken and a new election called.
    Guaranteed landslide for Trump?
    Why not?
  9. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    28 Jan '17 16:08
    Originally posted by vivify
    Checkmate.
    There is no checkmate in checkers, viv.
  10. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    100919
    28 Jan '17 16:12
    If Dims are so confident that there is no voter fraud, why not let it proceed? They should be encouraging an investigation, after all, it will make Trump look like a fool.
    I think they are more worried that they will be exposed.
  11. Standard membershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    56284
    28 Jan '17 16:14
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    Guaranteed landslide for Trump?
    Why not?
    I couldn't care less.
    Don't forget, I wanted Trump to win (comedy before rationality; that's what I say!).

    I am biggled as how people not on the voting registry can vote.
    I'd like that explained.
  12. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    9780
    28 Jan '17 16:181 edit
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    There is no checkmate in checkers, viv.
    It's a lost argument no matter how you answer.

    If you support a recount, you admit Trump was full of crap in saying that be election results are "not tainted by fraud". If you don't support a recount, you admit your OP is invalid, since you don't think a recount is warranted.

    That's checkmate. I wonder if Greenpawn will cover this thread in his next blog.
  13. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    100919
    28 Jan '17 16:23
    Originally posted by vivify
    It's a lost argument no matter how you answer.

    If you support a recount, you admit Trump was full of crap in saying that be election results are "not tainted by fraud". If you don't support a recount, you admit your OP is invalid, since you don't think a recount is warranted.

    That's checkmate. I wonder if Greenpawn will cover this thread in his next blog.
    Not at all, I think Trump wins in a landslide with the EC AND popular vote.
    Your problem is not realizing most of the voter fraud votes Democrat.
  14. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12091
    28 Jan '17 16:32
    Originally posted by shavixmir
    Well, if there's proof of voter fraud, the election results should stricken and a new election called.
    Why?

    The fraud didn't change the election. If the fraud had worked, Hillary would have been elected.
  15. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    28 Jan '17 16:53
    Originally posted by vivify
    It's a lost argument no matter how you answer.

    If you support a recount, you admit Trump was full of crap in saying that be election results are "not tainted by fraud". If you don't support a recount, you admit your OP is invalid, since you don't think a recount is warranted.

    That's checkmate. I wonder if Greenpawn will cover this thread in his next blog.
    Trump is claiming he didn't benefit from voter fraud, not that it didn't occur.
Back to Top