Stolen Election

The post that was quoted here has been removed

The final polls had HRC up by 3 points, the same as the early June ones so five months of Trump's negative campaigning didn't matter much. Clinton won the popular vote by about 2 points so the polls were reasonably accurate, but It's obvious that if the Democrat had won the popular vote by 9 or 10 points, there would have been zero chance of a different result in the Electoral College.

Originally posted by @tom-wolsey
No, what you're doing is disingenuous and obtuse. Feigning unawareness of what is utterly and completely obvious. Feigning the inability to type "clinton election rigged" in a google search.

Now then. You claimed that NOT ONE of any of the people I listed ever said the democrat primary was rigged. Ok fine. All I have to do is list one person to ...[text shortened]... t one of my sources had anything to do with Fox News so you can cease with that garbage as well.

Brazile said on CNN November 5, 2017 that there was " no evidence, none whatsoever" that the primaries were "rigged".

I suspect that when I'm able to check those links (I can't right now from my phone), I'll find that the word "rigged" is absent from the other individuals' quotes as well (except Trump's).

Originally posted by @tom-wolsey
Funny how, going back to the Bush days, every Democrat that has lost a presidential election--only lost because the election was "stolen."

Meanwhile, in case the low-information voters didn't pay attention: Our president would be Bernie Sanders if Clinton and the DNC hadn't stolen the democrat primaries.

So your fake outrage about "stolen" elections is appropriately falling on deaf ears and merely exposing you as hypocrites.

It is not uncommon for people to accuse others what they are guilty of. For instance, I knew a man obsessed with sex who used to accuse other people of "Going to location X to get with the prostitutes," or "trying to bang girls" because he is basically being nice and decent to them.

He was guilty of all of the above, and so he thought that other peopel operated in the same way as him.

Likewise, the Democrats who do use dirty tricks and try to steal elections cannot fathom a scenario where Pres. Trump wasn't using dirty tricks and trying to steal the election.

Originally posted by @philokalia
It is not uncommon for people to accuse others what they are guilty of. For instance, I knew a man obsessed with sex who used to accuse other people of "Going to location X to get with the prostitutes," or "trying to bang girls" because he is basically being nice and decent to them.

He was guilty of all of the above, and so he thought that other peop ...[text shortened]... fathom a scenario where Pres. Trump wasn't using dirty tricks and trying to steal the election.

That is an excellent insight and I totally agree. I came to a similar realization when a friend of mine (we were young) kept accusing me of stealing things from him. I thought it was strange because I never, ever exhibited any behavior that would lead him to those suspicions. And finally it occurred to me. It's because he was always looking for ways to cheat and steal from people and--exactly as you articulated--I realized that he just naturally assumed the minds of the people around him operated the same way.

Originally posted by @tom-wolsey
No, what you're doing is disingenuous and obtuse. Feigning unawareness of what is utterly and completely obvious. Feigning the inability to type "clinton election rigged" in a google search.

Now then. You claimed that NOT ONE of any of the people I listed ever said the democrat primary was rigged. Ok fine. All I have to do is list one person to ...[text shortened]... t one of my sources had anything to do with Fox News so you can cease with that garbage as well.

As I suspected, there's not a single direct quote in any of those from the people mentioned that says the primaries were "rigged".

There is this quote supposedly from Brazile's book:

Brazile cited the agreement as proof that, as she suspected prior to joining, “Hillary Clinton’s team had rigged the nomination process.”

If it's in her book, she later repudiated it:

Following Donna Brazile's claim that Hillary Clinton's campaign bankrolled the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 presidential election, the former interim chair of the DNC says she found "no evidence" the Democratic primary was rigged.

"I found no evidence, none whatsoever," she told ABC's "This Week."

https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/05/politics/donna-brazile-primary-rigged/index.html

Originally posted by @no1marauder
As I suspected, there's not a single direct quote in any of those from the people mentioned that says the primaries were "rigged".

There is this quote supposedly from Brazile's book:

Brazile cited the agreement as proof that, as she suspected prior to joining, “Hillary Clinton’s team had rigged the nomination process.”

If it's in her book, she ...[text shortened]... is Week."

https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/05/politics/donna-brazile-primary-rigged/index.html[/b]

Here is a video, so you can't parse words. Direct from the lips of Elizabeth Warren.

I picked a video so you can't do your wordplay game.

This is irrefutable and your claim above is utterly and completely destroyed.

This is just Elizabeth Warren, and I found the video in about 2 seconds:

YouTube : Warren-Process RIGGED

Originally posted by @tom-wolsey
Here is a video, so you can't parse words. Direct from the lips of Elizabeth Warren.

I picked a video so you can't do your wordplay game.

This is irrefutable and your claim above is utterly and completely destroyed.

This is just Elizabeth Warren, and I found the video in about 2 seconds:

[youtube Warren-Process RIGGED]XBYnJh45WS8[/youtube]

"I agree with what Donna Brazile has said over the last few days; that while there was some bias at the DNC, the overall 2016 primary process was fair and Hillary made history," Warren said in a Wednesday interview with MassLive.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/359645-warren-walks-back-claim-democratic-primary-was-rigged

There's a good article in Vox discussing the "rigged" allegation:

The core facts are straightforward: As Barack Obama’s presidency drew to a close, the DNC was deep in debt. In return for a bailout, DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz gave Hillary Clinton’s campaign more potential control over its operations and hiring decisions than was either ethical or wise. But those operations were mostly irrelevant to the primary and couldn’t have been used to rig the process even if anyone had wanted to use them that way; the primary schedule, debate schedule, and rules were set well in advance of these agreements. “I found nothing to say they were gaming the primary system,” Brazile told me. And while that contradicts the more sensational language she used in her book, it fits the facts she laid out both in her original piece and since.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/11/14/16640082/donna-brazile-warren-bernie-sanders-democratic-primary-rigged

So nobody "stole the election" as you initially claimed nor were the primaries "rigged".

Originally posted by @no1marauder
"I agree with what Donna Brazile has said over the last few days; that while there was some bias at the DNC, the overall 2016 primary process was fair and Hillary made history," Warren said in a Wednesday interview with MassLive.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/359645-warren-walks-back-claim-democratic-primary-was-rigged

So you just blow right by the video as if it doesn't exist? The words are there. More than once. Your refutation is an op/ed article that doesn't even address the video interview?

I can see that you aren't serious. You just won't admit that your claim that none of the people I listed ever directly said the election process was rigged... is wrong. Or a lie. Probably both.

Originally posted by @tom-wolsey
So you just blow right by the video as if it doesn't exist? The words are there. More than once. Your refutation is an op/ed article that doesn't even address the video interview?

I can see that you aren't serious. You just won't admit that your claim that none of the people I listed ever directly said the election process was rigged... is wrong. Or a lie. Probably both.

You must be an idiot. I don't waste time digging up Youtubes; the article cited was about a week after the interview you cited to and she clearly refutes any claim that the primary was "rigged".

Here's an article specifically mentioning the Woodruff interview:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2017/11/09/warren-changes-view-democratic-primary-from-rigged-fair/AFmRnFJlGHs2dBrpISYJwK/story.html

And here:

A spokeswoman for Warren later clarified that the senator agreed the DNC was rigged, not the primary process itself.

https://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/11/us_sen_elizabeth_warren_says_t.html

The video has proven, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that your counterclaim is wrong. There's no reason to discuss it any further. You lost. Period. Case closed.

You said that no one I listed was ever directly quoted using the word 'rigged' regarding the primary. The little 1 minute video I posted proves you wrong. I don't care how many "clarifications" from op/ed pieces you post. It doesn't take away from the fact that you were wrong.

Originally posted by @philokalia
It is not uncommon for people to accuse others what they are guilty of. For instance, I knew a man obsessed with sex who used to accuse other people of "Going to location X to get with the prostitutes," or "trying to bang girls" because he is basically being nice and decent to them.

He was guilty of all of the above, and so he thought that other peop ...[text shortened]... fathom a scenario where Pres. Trump wasn't using dirty tricks and trying to steal the election.

He didn't have to, the Russians were doing his dirty work for him, their fake twitter and FB accounts reached 129 MILLION people and some of them were swung away from Hillary for 100% sure.

There were only 150 million voters so they reached a majority of voters with their lies.

And so now we have a narcissistic sociopath liar for a POTUS.

Putin was LITERALLY laughing his ass of on Russian TV about the whole thing.

Originally posted by @sonhouse
And so now we have a narcissistic sociopath liar for a POTUS.

So, nothing has changed in the last 10 years. Ok thanks.

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
In my opinion, Biden would have had a good chance to win the election. Sanders? The GOP had a brutal campaign planned against him. They'd hammer "socialism" and the rape essay endlessly. Haven't heard about the rape essay? You sure as heck would have if Sanders would have been the nominee.

In any case, Clinton won the primary comfortably and Brazile ...[text shortened]... ayed the election, and you are the victim of a misinformation campaign if you believe otherwise.

How do you know it was only one debate question? Are you taking Brazile's word for it?