And I predict that if Trump looses he will claim that thousands of Mexicans where bussed in to vote, and therefore the election result is null and void.
I will take this bet. How much are you willing to lose when this prediction turns out to be incorrect?
Nothing, because I hope I'm wrong. But given that he aleady had that argument lined up for refusing to accept defeat in 2016, I think it would be a safe bet if I where inclined to gamble. I would also put money on criminal proceedings against whoever challenges him. How far he actually got with it would depend on those around him though. Best case scenario the only violence would be the secret service men dragging him kicking and screaming from the Oval Office.
Anyway, your problem, not mine. We have enough stupid politicians of our own busy screwing things up.
Anyway, your problem, not mine. We have enough stupid politicians of our own busy screwing things up.
*laugh* Yes, everyone has this problem. Ultimately, politicians all over the world are the same--egotistical, arrogant, working only to put money in their own pocket and/or the pockets of their largest campaign contributors, etc.
I predict that people will still have the right to vote in America by 2020.
And I predict that if Trump looses he will claim that thousands of Mexicans where bussed in to vote, and therefore the election result is null and void.
I'll bet you that if The Democrats lose in 2016 they'll claim it was a squad of Russian Hackers who stole the election...oh wait.
If Donald Trump was posting in this thread, @semiticgod would have had to ban him by now.
That may be the most accurate description of Trump's presidency I've seen. Well done, @jjstraka34. Well, the guy is coming to Poland and my colleague managed to get me tickets to the show on Thursday, so I'm going to check if his hands are really that small.
@Zaghoul Thank you for asking. It was loud, and crowded and gave me headache. Don't know what else I expected. Trump gave nice speech for sure, and I terrifies me how little it takes to send my people into euphoria - just say something nice about Warsaw Uprising, and how "Poland is smart, Poland is good, Poland is important". Of course, there wasn't much substance in that, but I would be surprised if there was. Frankly speaking, I'd spent that time better reading something. Or jogging.
@Zaghoul Thank you for asking. It was loud, and crowded and gave me headache. Don't know what else I expected. Trump gave nice speech for sure, and I terrifies me how little it takes to send my people into euphoria - just say something nice about Warsaw Uprising, and how "Poland is smart, Poland is good, Poland is important". Of course, there wasn't much substance in that, but I would be surprised if there was. Frankly speaking, I'd spent that time better reading something. Or jogging.
No protesting or such going on there at the event to speak of?
I predict that people will still have the right to vote in America by 2020.
And I predict that if Trump looses he will claim that thousands of Mexicans where bussed in to vote, and therefore the election result is null and void.
I'll bet you that if The Democrats lose in 2016 they'll claim it was a squad of Russian Hackers who stole the election...oh wait.
I'll bet you that if the Democrats lose in 2016, Clinton will concede the next day, and both she and Barack Obama will ask Americans to wish Trump the best of luck and hope for his success.
I'll also bet that if Trump's numbers go down, he'll fabricate a claim that the election was, through totally unspecified means, going to be rigged.
I'll also bet that in the final days of the election, if someone asks if he'll respect the election results if he lost, he'll say that he will "keep you in suspense" regarding whether he accepts the legitimacy of American democracy.
I'll also bet that if Trump wins the electoral vote but loses the popular vote, he'll lie and say the only reason he lost the popular vote was because millions of people committed easily detectable felonies in broad daylight by voting twice for Clinton.
I'll also bet that if there's a credible case for Russian interference, America's Republican-dominated national security establishment will publish a lengthy report documenting the evidence in dozens of bullet points listing the Kremlin's methods, motives, and historical background.
No protesting or such going on there at the event to speak of?
No, people were THRILLED. I mean, even earlier that day I saw people in American flags, with "Make America Great Again" hats and so on. I think there were like 10 people protesting in Warsaw.
One of the reasons Britain voted to leave the EU was the million Polish immigrants who don't realise that when a British person is extremely polite to you it doesn't mean they like you.
I've thought for a long time now that under a thin veneer of 'we're for the little guy', liberals have a bit of the 'I'm superior to you so you should vote for me or you're an idiot' thing going on underneath.
I've thought for a long time now that under a thin veneer of 'we're for the little guy', liberals have a bit of the 'I'm superior to you so you should vote for me or you're an idiot' thing going on underneath.
Which is far less pleasant than the old conservative routine of saying you're "pro little guy" then cutting taxes on the rich/big businesses?
Frankly, those not rich that voted for Trump certainly seem to have cut off their nose to spite Mexico, if not their face.
"I'll bet you that if the Democrats lose in 2016, Clinton will concede the next day, and both she and Barack Obama will ask Americans to wish Trump the best of luck and hope for his success."
Clinton still goes around blaming the Comey report for her loss but ok, she called to concede so its different.
Personally, i'll never understand the way people will find fault with and find nothing wrong with the exact same things depending upon who is saying them.
And no, something something Russia means aboslutely nothing to me until the left comes up with the proof they should have had from the beginning.
In their desperate bid to maintain legitimacy and explain their defeat they latched onto this conspiracy theory that even the far left like Van Jones now call nothing.
In the long run its going to be remembered for wild claims by democrats about Russia hacking the power grid and dossiers claiming outrageous lies but thats about it.
Although that reminds me, i've always maintained that "fact checking" websites on the internet largely don't exist, especially for political matters. My belief in this only strengthened today after learning that Politifact not only called the 17 Intelligence Agencies lie, that NYT and AP were forced to retract, a truth, but then doubled down after the fact, calling it a "reasonable inference" because there is no "evidence of disagreement". Sorry, doesn't work that way for fact checking, things arent assumed to be true until there is evidence of them not being true. Quite the opposite.
There is a very simple way to "explain" the defeat that has nothing to do with Russia. 10,000 people each in the 3 states voted for Trump instead, and since their votes count WAY more than anyone who lives in, say, California or New York, he won (I just looked this up, and in terms of Presidential voting power California and New York rank 51st and 48th respectively). There isn't anything needed to explain it besides the fact that the system is completely warped and implemented on a curve that is like giving Republicans a 10-point lead in the first quarter of a basketball game. Trump fans seem to forget that not 10,000, not 100,000 and not even one million more people voted for Hillary, but 3 million more people. Why the hell shouldn't they be upset?? Especially given the fact that it's happened twice (to the benefit of the exact same party BOTH times) in the last 16 years. Barring the Electoral College, the actual will of the people wouldn't have put a Republican into office since 1988. 29 years ago.
I predict that people will still have the right to vote in America by 2020.
And I predict that if Trump looses he will claim that thousands of Mexicans where bussed in to vote, and therefore the election result is null and void.
I'll bet you that if The Democrats lose in 2016 they'll claim it was a squad of Russian Hackers who stole the election...oh wait.
I'll bet you that if the Democrats lose in 2016, Clinton will concede the next day, and both she and Barack Obama will ask Americans to wish Trump the best of luck and hope for his success.
I'll also bet that if Trump's numbers go down, he'll fabricate a claim that the election was, through totally unspecified means, going to be rigged.
I'll also bet that in the final days of the election, if someone asks if he'll respect the election results if he lost, he'll say that he will "keep you in suspense" regarding whether he accepts the legitimacy of American democracy.
I'll also bet that if Trump wins the electoral vote but loses the popular vote, he'll lie and say the only reason he lost the popular vote was because millions of people committed easily detectable felonies in broad daylight by voting twice for Clinton.
I'll also bet that if there's a credible case for Russian interference, America's Republican-dominated national security establishment will publish a lengthy report documenting the evidence in dozens of bullet points listing the Kremlin's methods, motives, and historical background.
Do none of these facts mean anything?
The answer to your question is no, they don't mean anything. Because Trump and Trump supporters are waging a campaign whose sole goal is to make every single fact in public discourse negotiable. And once that happens (and it is already well on it's way to happening) then lies no longer exist, thus truth no longer exists, and the whole American enterprise is basically up Shit Creek.
Ivanka is now sitting in for her dad at G20 meetings, presumably because daddy is either too lazy or too tired. No one voted for this woman, she wasn't elected to anything. Apparently the new Presidential line of succession is:
1. Trump 2. His favorite daughter 3. His son-in-law 4. Mike Pence
Isn't this the exact type of monarchistic crap we started a war to get away from??
There is a very simple way to "explain" the defeat that has nothing to do with Russia. 10,000 people each in the 3 states voted for Trump instead, and since their votes count WAY more than anyone who lives in, say, California or New York, he won (I just looked this up, and in terms of Presidential voting power California and New York rank 51st and 48th respectively). There isn't anything needed to explain it besides the fact that the system is completely warped and implemented on a curve that is like giving Republicans a 10-point lead in the first quarter of a basketball game. Trump fans seem to forget that not 10,000, not 100,000 and not even one million more people voted for Hillary, but 3 million more people. Why the hell shouldn't they be upset?? Especially given the fact that it's happened twice (to the benefit of the exact same party BOTH times) in the last 16 years. Barring the Electoral College, the actual will of the people wouldn't have put a Republican into office since 1988. 29 years ago.
I predict that people will still have the right to vote in America by 2020.
And I predict that if Trump looses he will claim that thousands of Mexicans where bussed in to vote, and therefore the election result is null and void.
I'll bet you that if The Democrats lose in 2016 they'll claim it was a squad of Russian Hackers who stole the election...oh wait.
I'll bet you that if the Democrats lose in 2016, Clinton will concede the next day, and both she and Barack Obama will ask Americans to wish Trump the best of luck and hope for his success.
I'll also bet that if Trump's numbers go down, he'll fabricate a claim that the election was, through totally unspecified means, going to be rigged.
I'll also bet that in the final days of the election, if someone asks if he'll respect the election results if he lost, he'll say that he will "keep you in suspense" regarding whether he accepts the legitimacy of American democracy.
I'll also bet that if Trump wins the electoral vote but loses the popular vote, he'll lie and say the only reason he lost the popular vote was because millions of people committed easily detectable felonies in broad daylight by voting twice for Clinton.
I'll also bet that if there's a credible case for Russian interference, America's Republican-dominated national security establishment will publish a lengthy report documenting the evidence in dozens of bullet points listing the Kremlin's methods, motives, and historical background.
Do none of these facts mean anything?
The answer to your question is no, they don't mean anything. Because Trump and Trump supporters are waging a campaign whose sole goal is to make every single fact in public discourse negotiable. And once that happens (and it is already well on it's way to happening) then lies no longer exist, thus truth no longer exists, and the whole American enterprise is basically up Shit Creek.
Oh and I'll just bet that if it was the other way around and Clinton had won the election and not the popular vote you'd be shouting at the top of your lungs about how Trump should be president and we need to change the whole system because he got screwed. I sincerely doubt it. You'd be touting how visionary our founding fathers were for coming up with such a great system.
@Balrog99 where is your evidence for that assertion?? Seriously, most liberals are known to actively fight for other's rights, even at cost to themselves. That would suggest the opposite I think.
There is a very simple way to "explain" the defeat that has nothing to do with Russia. 10,000 people each in the 3 states voted for Trump instead, and since their votes count WAY more than anyone who lives in, say, California or New York, he won (I just looked this up, and in terms of Presidential voting power California and New York rank 51st and 48th respectively). There isn't anything needed to explain it besides the fact that the system is completely warped and implemented on a curve that is like giving Republicans a 10-point lead in the first quarter of a basketball game. Trump fans seem to forget that not 10,000, not 100,000 and not even one million more people voted for Hillary, but 3 million more people. Why the hell shouldn't they be upset?? Especially given the fact that it's happened twice (to the benefit of the exact same party BOTH times) in the last 16 years. Barring the Electoral College, the actual will of the people wouldn't have put a Republican into office since 1988. 29 years ago.
I predict that people will still have the right to vote in America by 2020.
And I predict that if Trump looses he will claim that thousands of Mexicans where bussed in to vote, and therefore the election result is null and void.
I'll bet you that if The Democrats lose in 2016 they'll claim it was a squad of Russian Hackers who stole the election...oh wait.
I'll bet you that if the Democrats lose in 2016, Clinton will concede the next day, and both she and Barack Obama will ask Americans to wish Trump the best of luck and hope for his success.
I'll also bet that if Trump's numbers go down, he'll fabricate a claim that the election was, through totally unspecified means, going to be rigged.
I'll also bet that in the final days of the election, if someone asks if he'll respect the election results if he lost, he'll say that he will "keep you in suspense" regarding whether he accepts the legitimacy of American democracy.
I'll also bet that if Trump wins the electoral vote but loses the popular vote, he'll lie and say the only reason he lost the popular vote was because millions of people committed easily detectable felonies in broad daylight by voting twice for Clinton.
I'll also bet that if there's a credible case for Russian interference, America's Republican-dominated national security establishment will publish a lengthy report documenting the evidence in dozens of bullet points listing the Kremlin's methods, motives, and historical background.
Do none of these facts mean anything?
The answer to your question is no, they don't mean anything. Because Trump and Trump supporters are waging a campaign whose sole goal is to make every single fact in public discourse negotiable. And once that happens (and it is already well on it's way to happening) then lies no longer exist, thus truth no longer exists, and the whole American enterprise is basically up Shit Creek.
Oh and I'll just bet that if it was the other way around and Clinton had won the election and not the popular vote you'd be shouting at the top of your lungs about how Trump should be president and we need to change the whole system because he got screwed. I sincerely doubt it. You'd be touting how visionary our founding fathers were for coming up with such a great system.
Whaa, whaaa cry me a river...
This would be a legitimate argument if this had happened once, or if it had happened twice, and once to each party. But that is not what has happened. It took place in 2000, when Bush lost by half a million votes and took the Presidency and it happened again less than 20 years later, this time with a 6x bigger vote discrepancy. Until this scenario actually benefits a Democrat in the real-world, I see no reason why it's even an issue. All recent historical evidence tells us it is obviously helping one parting and hurting the other. Obama isn't a barometer because he won overwhelming wins in both the electoral and popular vote twice. Both of the last two Republican Presidents were ushered into office with minority votes. When a Democrat is given the Presidency under the same circumstances, then there is a discussion to be had. But they haven't, and there is very little evidence to suggest they will. It's nearly impossible to imagine given the population of the States they have locked down.
And I would never tout the Founding Fathers for much of anything. I think at last half the Constitution is a outdated piece of garbage and we are running our country on a document that was produced before electricity and indoor plumbing. There are sections of it that were written explicitly to deal with specific issues that took place during the Revolutionary War that we continue to use as the basis for our gun and privacy laws.
The rules of the game were set from the beginning and both sides knew the rules. Now that they lost, they call it unfair and say they would have won if the rules had been different than what both parties knowingly agreed to from the outset.
Trump said had the electoral college not existed, he would have pursued a different strategy, targeted different states and probably with a different message. There would have been a different election altogether so theres no reason to assume things would turn out like they did in this one.
It's just wishful thinking from the defeated. Republicans dominate the House and Senate and ruled there during Obamas term as well.
This is because large swaths of the country are very red while the blue is mostly concentrated in a few select areas, most notably California.
This would be the case regardless and we would see just like we did with Obama, a Democrat president presiding over a mostly Republican government that wants nothing to do with it.
Before the red states would simply secede, that is.
@Balrog99 where is your evidence for that assertion?? Seriously, most liberals are known to actively fight for other's rights, even at cost to themselves. That would suggest the opposite I think.
Liberals actively fight for the rights of people who agree with them. Not so much if they don't.
What exactly does it cost them? This isn't the 1950's or 1960's when people actually risked their lives for their views. They risk very little and get to tout how progressive they are to all their peers. Whoopdy do...
Those people and communities that make up what is "nothing" to you and the Democrat Party have very real lives and concerns, and vote for them. Life expectancy for poor whites has been falling dramatically and is below poor hispanics at this point. These are mostly suicides and substance abuse issues. Does anybody care about the poor rural communities? Nobody in the Democrats, thats for sure. They would rather have people like Bernie who say you dont know what its like to be poor if you are white or the lady who said her job was to "shut white people down" when running for DNC chair.
Interesting you refer to secession; the last time that occured in the USA it was the side being disproportionately well represented that decided to secede. Also again, the less educated think it'll go great, seperating from the intelligencia.
Also, more Americans voted for arguably the worst candidate the Democrats could have fielded than voted red, remember? The USA is a blue country by a significant margin, it just hasn't officially acknowledged it, largely due to anti-liberal propaganda thats been big since the Depression. American propaganda has been very successful, yet remains largely invisible to Americans.
Those people and communities that make up what is "nothing" to you and the Democrat Party have very real lives and concerns, and vote for them. Life expectancy for poor whites has been falling dramatically and is below poor hispanics at this point. These are mostly suicides and substance abuse issues. Does anybody care about the poor rural communities? Nobody in the Democrats, thats for sure. They would rather have people like Bernie who say you dont know what its like to be poor if you are white or the lady who said her job was to "shut white people down" when running for DNC chair.
No, I am talking about the large swaths of land you point to on a map as if that means something, not people. Alot of this "Red America" is, literally, NOTHING. I just drove through some of it yesterday. I've driven through much more of it over the course of my life. Parts of Wyoming and North Dakota are veritable wastelands of grass and fields. I drove through Wyoming once at 5am and thought I had entered a Mad Max movie. Thank god we'd gassed-up earlier, as I didn't see another station for nearly 2 hours.
If by anti liberal propaganda, you mean Gallup polls, than yes, anti liberal propaganda does indeed put conservatives as 11% more of the population than liberals.
Comments
Anyway, your problem, not mine. We have enough stupid politicians of our own busy screwing things up.
Thank you for asking.
It was loud, and crowded and gave me headache. Don't know what else I expected.
Trump gave nice speech for sure, and I terrifies me how little it takes to send my people into euphoria - just say something nice about Warsaw Uprising, and how "Poland is smart, Poland is good, Poland is important". Of course, there wasn't much substance in that, but I would be surprised if there was.
Frankly speaking, I'd spent that time better reading something. Or jogging.
I'll also bet that if Trump's numbers go down, he'll fabricate a claim that the election was, through totally unspecified means, going to be rigged.
I'll also bet that in the final days of the election, if someone asks if he'll respect the election results if he lost, he'll say that he will "keep you in suspense" regarding whether he accepts the legitimacy of American democracy.
I'll also bet that if Trump wins the electoral vote but loses the popular vote, he'll lie and say the only reason he lost the popular vote was because millions of people committed easily detectable felonies in broad daylight by voting twice for Clinton.
I'll also bet that if there's a credible case for Russian interference, America's Republican-dominated national security establishment will publish a lengthy report documenting the evidence in dozens of bullet points listing the Kremlin's methods, motives, and historical background.
Do none of these facts mean anything?
No, people were THRILLED. I mean, even earlier that day I saw people in American flags, with "Make America Great Again" hats and so on. I think there were like 10 people protesting in Warsaw.
One of the reasons Britain voted to leave the EU was the million Polish immigrants who don't realise that when a British person is extremely polite to you it doesn't mean they like you.
I have no idea what you mean by that.
I've thought for a long time now that under a thin veneer of 'we're for the little guy', liberals have a bit of the 'I'm superior to you so you should vote for me or you're an idiot' thing going on underneath.
Frankly, those not rich that voted for Trump certainly seem to have cut off their nose to spite Mexico, if not their face.
Clinton still goes around blaming the Comey report for her loss but ok, she called to concede so its different.
Personally, i'll never understand the way people will find fault with and find nothing wrong with the exact same things depending upon who is saying them.
And no, something something Russia means aboslutely nothing to me until the left comes up with the proof they should have had from the beginning.
In their desperate bid to maintain legitimacy and explain their defeat they latched onto this conspiracy theory that even the far left like Van Jones now call nothing.
In the long run its going to be remembered for wild claims by democrats about Russia hacking the power grid and dossiers claiming outrageous lies but thats about it.
Although that reminds me, i've always maintained that "fact checking" websites on the internet largely don't exist, especially for political matters. My belief in this only strengthened today after learning that Politifact not only called the 17 Intelligence Agencies lie, that NYT and AP were forced to retract, a truth, but then doubled down after the fact, calling it a "reasonable inference" because there is no "evidence of disagreement". Sorry, doesn't work that way for fact checking, things arent assumed to be true until there is evidence of them not being true. Quite the opposite.
Q: You are in England. You arrive at a queue at the same time as someone else. They say "after you". Do you say:
a) "Thank you very much" or
b) "No, after you".
The Brits aren't very tolerant towards anyone who gets it wrong. They won't show it though, they will just plot how to get back at you.
And that was one of the reasons of Brexit?
1. Trump
2. His favorite daughter
3. His son-in-law
4. Mike Pence
Isn't this the exact type of monarchistic crap we started a war to get away from??
Whaa, whaaa cry me a river...
And I would never tout the Founding Fathers for much of anything. I think at last half the Constitution is a outdated piece of garbage and we are running our country on a document that was produced before electricity and indoor plumbing. There are sections of it that were written explicitly to deal with specific issues that took place during the Revolutionary War that we continue to use as the basis for our gun and privacy laws.
Trump said had the electoral college not existed, he would have pursued a different strategy, targeted different states and probably with a different message. There would have been a different election altogether so theres no reason to assume things would turn out like they did in this one.
It's just wishful thinking from the defeated. Republicans dominate the House and Senate and ruled there during Obamas term as well.
This is because large swaths of the country are very red while the blue is mostly concentrated in a few select areas, most notably California.
This would be the case regardless and we would see just like we did with Obama, a Democrat president presiding over a mostly Republican government that wants nothing to do with it.
Before the red states would simply secede, that is.
What exactly does it cost them? This isn't the 1950's or 1960's when people actually risked their lives for their views. They risk very little and get to tout how progressive they are to all their peers. Whoopdy do...
Also, more Americans voted for arguably the worst candidate the Democrats could have fielded than voted red, remember? The USA is a blue country by a significant margin, it just hasn't officially acknowledged it, largely due to anti-liberal propaganda thats been big since the Depression. American propaganda has been very successful, yet remains largely invisible to Americans.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/201152/conservative-liberal-gap-continues-narrow-tuesday.aspx