2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Amerika

There are reports of potential voter fraud and irregularities in California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland. Massachusetts, New York, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island and Virginia. Why hasn’t Jill Stein and her mysterious backers targeted these states for recounts? Oh yeah, they went to Hillary Clinton.

osmiumartist

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/26/hillary-clinton-attorney-jill-stein-wisconsin-recount
If Clinton had 1% of the class of Obama she wouldn't be in this position to embarrass herself in the first place as she'd be president elect.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

There are reports of potential voter fraud and irregularities in California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland. Massachusetts, New York, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island and Virginia. Why hasn’t Jill Stein and her mysterious backers targeted these states for recounts? Oh yeah, they went to Hillary Clinton.

Not reports! Dear lord the horror!

Reports from who?

osmiumartist

Brian? wrote: »

Not reports! Dear lord the horror!

Reports from who?

Probably the same super-reliable and not at all shilling people who reported "anomalies" in Wisconsin.

KingBrian2

Igotadose wrote: »

Well, I think having someone who's made a career of studying the constitution is probably a good idea for the person responsible for supporting it in his day job. That'll be Trump in about 6 weeks.

And, I can't wait to see who Trump appoints. If he does. Ethics aren't his strong suit.

Their must be teams of constitutional experts out there. He could go ask Ron Paul or Alex Jones around for dinner.

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

Not reports! Dear lord the horror!

Reports from who?

http://heavy.com/news/2016/11/election-fraud-list-which-states-had-have-voter-fraud-allegations-early-voting-rigged-hoax-truth-trump-clinton-bernie-flipped-suppression-dnc/

So why do YOU suppose Jill Stein, and now backed by Hillary Clinton, isn't going after any of those states I listed for a recount? It's okay, we all know... you can say it.

20Cent

osmiumartist wrote: »

Probably the same super-reliable and not at all shilling people who reported "anomalies" in Wisconsin.

The anomalies being checked in Jill Steins recounts are due to large differences between voting patterns in machine and non machine areas where results would be expected to be similar.
Not sure what the source of trumps information about millions of illegal votes. Think he just made it up.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

http://heavy.com/news/2016/11/election-fraud-list-which-states-had-have-voter-fraud-allegations-early-voting-rigged-hoax-truth-trump-clinton-bernie-flipped-suppression-dnc/

So why do YOU suppose Jill Stein, and now backed by Hillary Clinton, isn't going after any of those states I listed for a recount? It's okay, we all know... you can say it.

Because no one is willing to spend the money to have those states recounted. Why do you think it is?

Am I supposed to read through that entire thing? There's allegations of rigged primaries at the top. Can you give me something reputable on the general election?

osmiumartist

20Cent wrote: »

The anomalies being checked in Jill Steins recounts are due to large differences between voting patterns in machine and non machine areas where results would be expected to be similar.

You mean these "anomolies"?
http://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/801221907609579520
Different parts of a state have different people in them. Who would've guessed such an outlandish thing?

26000 Elephants

osmiumartist wrote: »

Not really since none of the documented transactions were bailouts of any sort. The imaginary ones that nobody can provide any evidence whatsoever of are damning in the extreme though. What a traitor.

No, I think we provided enough evidence that they were bailouts. And they are not unique.

Read up on how he had to get Daddy to buy $3m in chips in Trump Taj Mahal so he could make an interest payment on the junk bonds he used to 'finance' it. Humiliating stuff. He was even fined by the gambling commission for breaking their rules ( you cannot 'loan' money to a casino by buying chips and holding them)

Not that it mattered, as it all went bust. TWICE!!! :)

osmiumartist

26000 Elephants wrote: »

No, I think we provided enough evidence that they were bailouts. And they are not unique.

If we take your redefinition of "bought goods" as "bailing out" then you are 100% correct, he was bailed out.
Any chance you'd give the names of the donors, the amounts, the dates, maybe any one single sliver of a wisp of evidence to back up your claim about "other bailouts"? I've asked you three times already now so this is your very last chance!

20Cent

osmiumartist wrote: »

You mean these "anomolies"?
http://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/801221907609579520
Different parts of a state have different people in them. Who would've guessed such an outlandish thing?

That's one possible explanation.
Where is trumps millions of illegal vote claims coming from?
The president elect is claiming massive voter fraud a very serious allegation.

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

Because no one is willing to spend the money to have those states recounted. Why do you think it is?

Am I supposed to read through that entire thing? There's allegations of rigged primaries at the top. Can you give me something reputable on the general election?

Why would no one be willing to spend the money to have those states recounted, but willing to spend the money to have Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan recounted? I think you're grasping at straws, here. And I already stated what I believed the reason to be. Do you agree with me?

And what makes you believe that the source I provided is not reputable? Is information provided on each state erroneous? And if so, why? I dunno... it seems reputable and detailed to me.

osmiumartist

20Cent wrote: »

That's one possible explanation.
Where is trumps millions of illegal vote claims coming from?
The president elect is claiming massive voter fraud a very serious allegation.

Probably made it up to annoy people and troll Stein and Clinton and their fans more.
It's working.

20Cent

osmiumartist wrote: »

Probably made it up to annoy people and troll Stein and Clinton and their fans more.
It's working.

True but very divisive considering he needs to bring the country together. Taunting opponents, doubting the US's democratic system and trolling people not a good way for a smooth transition of power.

BoatMad

osmiumartist wrote: »

Probably made it up to annoy people and troll Stein and Clinton and their fans more.
It's working.

very very presidential

osmiumartist

BoatMad wrote: »

very very presidential

I doubt the Republicans will be damaged as much by it as the Democrats will be by backing Stein's "random" recounts.

26000 Elephants

osmiumartist wrote: »

If we take your redefinition of "bought goods" as "bailing out" then you are 100% correct, he was bailed out.

Ok, so you are pleading ignorance - we dont need to explain to you the difference between buying an asset backed loan and buying a burger.

Any chance you'd give the names of the donors, the amounts, the dates, maybe any one single sliver of a wisp of evidence to back up your claim about "other bailouts"? I've asked you three times already now so this is your very last chance!

Donor: Fred Trump
Amount $3.3m (certified cheque for $3.35 million payable to Trump Castle)
Date: December 17, 1990
'wisp of evidence' ???

Another was a relatively minor fine of $65,000 levied against the Trump Castle in 1990 after Mr. Trump's father, Fred Trump, made an illegal loan to his son to allow him to make his soaring bond payments. By buying $3.5 million worth of chips at the Trump Castle but not making a single wager, Fred Trump allowed Donald Trump to use the money for his payment.

source

osmiumartist

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Donor: Fred Trump
Amount $3.3m (certified cheque for $3.35 million payable to Trump Castle)
Date: December 17, 1990
'wisp of evidence' ???



source

Now, let's be clear what you are claiming here: Donald Trump's own father was bailing him out "for political gain" in 20 years time when he would be running for president? That's your story?

26000 Elephants

osmiumartist wrote: »

Now, let's be clear what you are claiming here: Donald Trump's own father was bailing him out "for political gain" in 20 years time when he would be running for president? That's your story?

Dunno. Maybe pop was a clinton loving headchopper too. who knows? (probably 50% accurate)

you ask questions. i answered them.

if you dont like it, tough. Pick a different political hero.

osmiumartist

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Dunno. Maybe pop was a clinton loving headchopper too. who knows? (probably 50% accurate)

you ask questions. i answered them.

if you dont like it, tough. Pick a different political hero.

Oh, you've decided to pretend Trump is my hero? You really do like just making stuff up don't you?
The Trumps are headchoppers now? What?
Basically, is any of this drivel you're posting supposed to make an ounce of sense?

Billy86

osmiumartist wrote: »

Not really since none of the documented transactions were bailouts of any sort. The imaginary ones that nobody can provide any evidence whatsoever of are damning in the extreme though. What a traitor.

And again...

http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/bail-out
[TRANSITIVE] to help a person or organization that is having problems, especially financial problems

Trump had massive financial problems. He got bailed out of them, in part by the House of Saud purchasing items from him well above market value (when someone is desperate for cash you typically try to offer them well below market value). Yep, sounds like bailing someone out.

But you're happy to ignore it because it's Trump and not Clinton. Like I said, hilariously transparent.

Billy86

26000 Elephants wrote: »

No, I think we provided enough evidence that they were bailouts. And they are not unique.

And that Trump never even denied them being bailouts.

K-9

@26000 Elephants & osmiumartist, cut it out.

As for this bail out discussion, I'd suggest bailing out of it! Seriously, we're just going round in circles and somebody will end getting frustrated and there'll be cards and/or bans!

Christy42

Amerika wrote: »

http://heavy.com/news/2016/11/election-fraud-list-which-states-had-have-voter-fraud-allegations-early-voting-rigged-hoax-truth-trump-clinton-bernie-flipped-suppression-dnc/

So why do YOU suppose Jill Stein, and now backed by Hillary Clinton, isn't going after any of those states I listed for a recount? It's okay, we all know... you can say it.

Why isn't Trump?

He clearly believes there was Electoral fraud. Why doesn't he care? He can and should get any state rechecked to ensure it won't happen in future elections and to guarantee the state of American democracy. Unless of course he is taking a load of bull#$#$ in which case he won't bother.

oscarBravo

osmiumartist wrote: »

Probably made it up to annoy people and troll Stein and Clinton and their fans more.
It's working.

So the candidate who called one of his opponents "Lyin' Ted" is being cheered by his supporters for being a liar.

The same supporters who were delighted to hear him talk about "Crooked Hillary" don't seem remotely troubled by the fact that he has effectively announced his intention to turn the Presidency into the most blatant kleptocracy in American history.

I guess you don't have to be a dyed-in-the-wool hypocrite to be a Trump supporter - but it certainly helps.

oscarBravo

Christy42 wrote: »

Unless of course he is taking a load of bull#$#$ in which case he won't bother.

Of course he's talking bull. He's Donald Trump. How can you tell when he's lying? His lips are moving.

That's apparently not even an insult: his supporters applaud it.

InTheTrees

The President Elect says he believes that there were up to Three Million illegal votes cast and yet he has no intention of seeking any kind of investigation???

Hilarious isnt it? And we're going to have four years of this.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

Why would no one be willing to spend the money to have those states recounted, but willing to spend the money to have Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan recounted? I think you're grasping at straws, here. And I already stated what I believed the reason to be. Do you agree with me?

I grasped at nothing. These are swing states that Trump won. That's why.

And what makes you believe that the source I provided is not reputable? Is information provided on each state erroneous? And if so, why? I dunno... it seems reputable and detailed to me.

The like has stories from as far back as 2008. It's way too much info to sort through to see if it has any merit. I didn't say it wasn't reputable, but given that it cites "reports" from Facebook and Reddit it's not looking too sharp.

Can you link me up with some credible reports of voter fraud from the 2016 general election please?

26000 Elephants

The only voter fraud was convincing 48% of voters into believing Trump will somehow make america great again.

osmiumartist

oscarBravo wrote: »

So the candidate who called one of his opponents "Lyin' Ted" is being cheered by his supporters for being a liar.

The same supporters who were delighted to hear him talk about "Crooked Hillary" don't seem remotely troubled by the fact that he has effectively announced his intention to turn the Presidency into the most blatant kleptocracy in American history.

I guess you don't have to be a dyed-in-the-wool hypocrite to be a Trump supporter - but it certainly helps.

Like I said, it's obviously working. Very entertaining too.

osmiumartist

oscarBravo wrote: »

Of course he's talking bull. He's Donald Trump. How can you tell when he's lying? His lips are moving.

That's apparently not even an insult: his supporters applaud it.

The same way Clinton lovers cheer on her straight faced lies and love headchopping terrorists. Clinton supporters are basically terrorist jihadis fans. And they're not one bit ashamed of it!
Just as well there's no Clinton fans here huh.

osmiumartist

26000 Elephants wrote: »

The only voter fraud was convincing 48% of voters into believing Trump will somehow make america great again.

Imagine convincing 52% of voters you won't start world war 3 and that you don't love headchoppers and cultist dictators. I guess some utter morons will believe anything. I guess maybe they knew and voted for her anyway? Is that better or worse than buying her horsecrap?

InTheTrees

osmiumartist wrote: »

The same way Clinton...blah blah blah....

The elections over. Trump won. You're going to have to start defending his actions now.

osmiumartist

InTheTrees wrote: »

The elections over. Trump won. You're going to have to start defending his actions now.

Not in thread ABOUT THE ELECTION I don't.
In the election (the topic of this thread) the choice was Clinton or Trump.
There's other threads I'm sure if you would like to discuss a different topic more to your liking?

Amerika

Christy42 wrote: »

Why isn't Trump?

He clearly believes there was Electoral fraud. Why doesn't he care? He can and should get any state rechecked to ensure it won't happen in future elections and to guarantee the state of American democracy. Unless of course he is taking a load of bull#$#$ in which case he won't bother.

Should Trump push to see how many illegals voted in the election? Over the weekend Trump again made mention of about three million illegal voters. And again over this weekend the White House assured us that no fraud took place in the presidential elections. Isn't that a kick in the pants... Trumps believes Obama, and Hillary considers Obama a liar.

And how soon we forget that for months the Democrats pressured Trump to accept the outcome of the election. (Of course that was when a Hillary Clinton win was a given.) I guess now that Trump won, history starts today, eh?

Trump is for voter ID laws. That would be the way to insure a good election. SO, don't you think voter ID laws are a good thing now?

Amerika

oscarBravo wrote: »

So the candidate who called one of his opponents "Lyin' Ted" is being cheered by his supporters for being a liar.

The same supporters who were delighted to hear him talk about "Crooked Hillary" don't seem remotely troubled by the fact that he has effectively announced his intention to turn the Presidency into the most blatant kleptocracy in American history.

I guess you don't have to be a dyed-in-the-wool hypocrite to be a Trump supporter - but it certainly helps.

Being a liar for saying 'We'll see?"

As for Trump not targeting Hillary for wrongdoing, I believe he noted he won't abuse his power as President to target her. But he will appoint a new Attorney General. And that AG, on his/her own decision based on the rule of law, may decide to prosecute Hillary and the Clinton Foundation, also IRS agents abusing power by targeting conservatives, and a couple other injustices the Obama administration pushed. Many of us believe Trump, unlike Obama, will not try to inject his power and influence into the pursuit of justice. If the decision is not to prosecute, Trump will be okay with it, and visa versa.


(edit: One side note about Trump accepting money from his father.... Wasn't Trump a democrat at the time? )

Christy42

Amerika wrote: »

Should Trump push to see how many illegals voted in the election? Over the weekend Trump again made mention of about three million illegal voters. And again over this weekend the White House assured us that no fraud took place in the presidential elections. Isn't that a kick in the pants... Trumps believes Obama, and Hillary considers Obama a liar.

And how soon we forget that for months the Democrats pressured Trump to accept the outcome of the election. (Of course that was when a Hillary Clinton win was a given.) I guess now that Trump won, history starts today, eh?

Trump is for voter ID laws. That would be the way to insure a good election. SO, don't you think voter ID laws are a good thing now?

He should push to see how many illegals voted. He won't because he knows the answer is tiny. The Democrats and Hillary have stated that they don't believe any fraud took place either. This is Jill Stein. I can imagine she simply doesn't like someone who thinks the Chinese made up global warming for her own reasons.

I think investigations should be made and they can recommend the best ways to stop whatever fraud is happening if any (it is likely none).

Come on it is 4 years to the next one. Why is Trump so critical of investigations if he believes fraud took place.

Hank Scorpio

By a lot of "real news" outlets a recount in Pennsylvania is next to impossible as the deadline has long passed.

Hank Scorpio

Christy42 wrote: »

Why is Trump so critical of investigations if he believes fraud took place.

Probably because they're only attacking Swing states in which he won closely and it's undermining his right to Presidency. New Hampshire for example she only won by 2000 votes.

Brian?

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Probably because they're only attacking Swing states in which he won closely and it's undermining his right to Presidency. New Hampshire for example she only won by 2000 votes.

Why doesn't initiate the proceedings for a recount in NH?

Why doesn't he hand the evidence of this massive voter fraud over to the justice department? Massive is not hyperbole here.

Christy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Probably because they're only attacking Swing states in which he won closely and it's undermining his right to Presidency. New Hampshire for example she only won by 2000 votes.

He also thinks fraud took place. Why isn't he conducting more investigations. He is full of it.

If he thought fraud had taken pace he would have supported the investigations and started some where he believed it had taken place.

Instead we have the baseless claims of the foreigners stopped him winning the popular vote but he isn't going to look into it at all but his followers still drink up.

RobertKK

Paul Begala who is a Democrat strategist and supporter last night called Trump a genius.
He said Trump settled the Trump University case, then attacked the musical Hamilton so everyone was talking about Hamilton.
Then there was the talk of a conflict of interests with his businesses so he goes on a twitter rant about the election and how he won the popular vote due to millions of illegal votes. So people stoppped talking about a conflict of interests and instead have been talking about the election.
Begala seemed really impressed at how Trump manipulates the news stories, that while it may seem erratic what he posts on twitter, doing what he has done has achieved the aims he sought.

There was a Republican guy on he same show on Anderson 360 who said there are people who are dead who are still registered to vote, and people who are registered in more than one state to vote. The figure for both combines came into the millions.

oscarBravo

Amerika wrote: »

Many of us believe Trump, unlike Obama, will not try to inject his power and influence into the pursuit of justice.

I'm sure that if his AG just happens to make a completely unilateral decision to fire up a witchhunt against Clinton, he'll deny any involvement. And, of course, his supporters will develop another dose of that incredibly useful selective amnesia they've perfected recently, and conveniently forget all about the fact that he made a campaign promise to abuse his power and have his opponent jailed.

But hey: maybe it's possible that Trump won't waste any power and influence on Hillary. It's becoming clear that his plans for his power and influence revolve primarily around enriching himself and his family.

Akrasia

RobertKK wrote: »

Paul Begala who is a Democrat strategist and supporter last night called Trump a genius.
He said Trump settled the Trump University case, then attacked the musical Hamilton so everyone was talking about Hamilton.
Then there was the talk of a conflict of interests with his businesses so he goes on a twitter rant about the election and how he won the popular vote due to millions of illegal votes. So people stoppped talking about a conflict of interests and instead have been talking about the election.
Begala seemed really impressed at how Trump manipulates the news stories, that while it may seem erratic what he posts on twitter, doing what he has done has achieved the aims he sought.

There was a Republican guy on he same show on Anderson 360 who said there are people who are dead who are still registered to vote, and people who are registered in more than one state to vote. The figure for both combines came into the millions.

Trumps strategy of distracting attention by being a total clown is going to eventually backfire

You can only get away with that kind of thing for so long before people realise that the house is on fire and the guy in charge has been stoking the flames the whole time.

26000 Elephants

RobertKK wrote: »

Then there was the talk of a conflict of interests with his businesses so he goes on a twitter rant about the election and how he won the popular vote due to millions of illegal votes. So people stoppped talking about a conflict of interests and instead have been talking about the election.
.

Is there any way to respond to stuff like this without coming across as trolling? I dont think its possible really.

I mean, infants figure out the concept of object permanence by the end of the sensoremotor stage (within 2 years), yet you think by holding up the cuddly toy of Illegal voting in one hand that we all forget the existence of massive conflict of interest? ( not to mention business incompetence, disregard for the law and only a passing acquaintance with honesty)

InTheTrees

Akrasia wrote: »

Trumps strategy of distracting attention by being a total clown is going to eventually backfire

You can only get away with that kind of thing for so long before people realise that the house is on fire and the guy in charge has been stoking the flames the whole time.

Its still two months before the inauguration and he can't control himself.

After he becomes president it won't be so easy for him to squirm away from these idiotic statements he makes.

Alleging three million illegal votes but not being concerned about investigating is just weird.

Akrasia

InTheTrees wrote: »

Its still two months before the inauguration and he can't control himself.

After he becomes president it won't be so easy for him to squirm away from these idiotic statements he makes.

Alleging three million illegal votes but not being concerned about investigating is just weird.

Want to know where he got his '3 million illegal voters' claim?

You guessed it, Alex Jones

Trump isn't bothering to attend intelligence briefings, he's too busy repeating the conspiracy theories he sees on 'infowars'

http://www.infowars.com/report-three-million-votes-in-presidential-election-cast-by-illegal-aliens/

K-9

Some people say...

It really is a quite clever get out clause. Must start using it myself. Some people say the earth is flat...

InTheTrees

Akrasia wrote: »

Want to know where he got his '3 million illegal voters' claim?

You guessed it, Alex Jones

Trump isn't bothering to attend intelligence briefings, he's too busy repeating the conspiracy theories he sees on 'infowars'

He should make alex jones the white house press secretary. That'd shake things up.

After Jan 20th when the worlds press really starts paying attention is when its really going to be Fun.