• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

I was wrong

HumblePi said:
Well that's just not smart to believe that anyone could actually "prove" votes were changed. But these investigations by the Senate and the FBI provide documentation, clear evidence of Russia's interference in the election through phony ads on social media telling people they could vote for Hillary online or from their phone with a single 'click'. People believed that was true and many people may have fallen for that and used their phone to vote to a bogus website. Those are votes that weren't counted for Hillary Clinton. The negative campaign ads portraying Hillary Clinton as an invalid or feeble, were ads produced by Russian troll farms. This was proven true and not hard to prove by the FBI who tracked those ads to people that worked in Russian troll farms.

So no, it's not possible to point to Minnie Smith in Minneapolis and say 'Look!! She voted because Russia convinced her to vote for Trump!' No, that's impossible to pin down. Nevertheless, the hundreds of thousands of fake Facebook and Twitters accounts that were taken down by the FBI were all out there spreading disinformation in order to help Trump win. Those are facts.

screen-shot-2016-11-03-at-11-32-31-am.png
Click to expand...

Countries interfere in other countries' elections. So what? The US has been doing it for decades if not centuries. It is up to us to make sure that others do not change our election results. Hell, when Obama found out that Russia was trying to interfere in our 2016 election (they had been doing it long before 2016), Obama asked them to please stop and told his own people to stand down and let Russia do it. Then, when he didn't like the results of the election, all of a sudden it was important to him. China and Iran are trying to get Biden elected. What is Trump going to do about that? The very same thing that Obama did in 2016, nothing. It is what it is.
 
SCrider said:
an outdated electoral college system. She won the popular vote by a wide margin..
Click to expand...

Outdated? How would you update the electoral college? It does get updated on a regular basis as Congress changes.
 
Q says to stop your stupid posts. You are hurting Q's chances in 2024
 
digitusmedius said:
So, you're reduced to the classic perp statement to the cops: you can't prove anything. You cultists used to simply claim that was no Russian interference or even attempts or any contacts between the campaign and Russians at all. The Senate intel report kicked the horse out from under you for that lie. That tiny piece of ice of lies you're sitting on in the vast ocean of fact is melting quickly.
Click to expand...

When you haven't done anything then you can't prove anything. People voted for Trump because they voted for Trump. People voted for Hillary because they voted for Hillary. Hell, you guys claim that Russia stole the election while admitting that Hillary won the popular vote. The electoral college is the electoral college. People don't vote based on what Russians are telling them and people don't vote anymore because of what Hollywood or the MSM tells them to do. That's what has really got your goat. Hollywood and the MSM tried to influence the election against Trump and you're mad because they didn't succeed.
 
Moderate Right said:
When you haven't done anything then you can't prove anything. People voted for Trump because they voted for Trump. People voted for Hillary because they voted for Hillary. Hell, you guys claim that Russia stole the election while admitting that Hillary won the popular vote. The electoral college is the electoral college. People don't vote based on what Russians are telling them and people don't vote anymore because of what Hollywood or the MSM tells them to do. That's what has really got your goat. Hollywood and the MSM tried to influence the election against Trump and you're mad because they didn't succeed.
Click to expand...

If I've learned nothing else about you, MR, is that it's useless to lead you to facts and truth. Wait, there's a second thing: you also always have a bizarre conspiracy theory handy when you're trying to counter actual events as, e.g., documented in the Senate Intel commitee's reports.
 
Moderate Right said:
Countries interfere in other countries' elections. So what? The US has been doing it for decades if not centuries. It is up to us to make sure that others do not change our election results. Hell, when Obama found out that Russia was trying to interfere in our 2016 election (they had been doing it long before 2016), Obama asked them to please stop and told his own people to stand down and let Russia do it. Then, when he didn't like the results of the election, all of a sudden it was important to him. China and Iran are trying to get Biden elected. What is Trump going to do about that? The very same thing that Obama did in 2016, nothing. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

There must be a tomato somewhere in that word salad but I'm durned if I can find it.
 
Moderate Right said:
LOL. Then how did he beat Hillary? Oh yeah, I forgot, the Russians elected Trump.
Click to expand...

Well it was not the American people, he lost by nearly 3 million votes with them. Cambridge Analytica gave Trump the data to squeak out a win in the 3 blue States by targeting Bernie supporters and Manafort gave it to the Russians and Putin's trolls did the rest. The good news is this can NEVER happen twice.

Leaked: Cambridge Analytica's blueprint for Trump victory | UK news | The Guardian

The Trump-Bernie voters from 2016 are nearly non-existent now - CNNPolitics
 
SCrider said:
an outdated electoral college system. She won the popular vote by a wide margin..
Click to expand...

The EC was most popular with the South as another way to weaken the power of northern states where the talk of abolitionists was gaining strength. But even Hamilton, a vocal opponent of slavery, argued for it with uncharacteristic apparent naïveté (he wasn't particularly fond of what we call populism, truth be told) :

Hamilton's understanding of the Electoral College

Federalist No. 68 is the continuation of Alexander Hamilton's analysis of the presidency, in this case concerning the method of electing the president. Hamilton argues the advantages of the indirect electoral process described in Article II Section 1 of the Constitution, although in the case of a tied vote in the Electoral College, the House of Representatives was to make the choice.

Hamilton viewed the system as superior to direct popular election. First, he recognized, the "sense of the people should operate in the choice", and would through the election of the electors to the Electoral College. Second, the electors would be:

...men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice.

Such men would be "most likely to have the information and discernment" to make a good choice and to avoid the election of anyone "not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications."

Corruption of an electoral process could most likely arise from the desire of "foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils." To minimize risk of foreign machinations and inducements, the electoral college members would have only a "transient existence" and no elector could be a "senator, representative, or other person holding a place of trust or profit under the United States"; electors would make their choice in a "detached situation", whereas a preexisting body of federal office-holders "might be tampered with beforehand to prostitute their votes".

Also, a successful candidate for the office of president would have to have the distinguished qualities to appeal to electors from many states, not just one or a few states:

Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States.

Hamilton expressed confidence that:

It will not be too strong to say, that there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue.
Click to expand...

In the beginning, electors were not political and were to be selected by the state legislatures based on their incorruptible and righteous reputations each completely free to vote his conscience. Even before Hamilton's death in 1804 state's were selecting electors by popular vote and the idea of forcing all electors to vote the way the popular vote went in the state. And eventually that became the rule all across the country with the exception of ME and NE which allows electors to be selected by congressional district. IOW, the EC became corrupted by political machinations in its infancy and has been so ever since.
 
Last edited:
iguanaman said:
Well it was not the American people, he lost by nearly 3 million votes with them. Cambridge Analytica gave Trump the data
Click to expand...

And, as the Senate Intel report told us last week Manafort was giving campaign polling date to Kilimnik who passed it on to the RGU in Russia which then targeted states like PA, WI and MI via social media with anti-Clinton propaganda. And, the DNI says they're at it again now (actually, it's never stopped as evidenced by some DPers).
 
digitusmedius said:
If I've learned nothing else about you, MR, is that it's useless to lead you to facts and truth. Wait, there's a second thing: you also always have a bizarre conspiracy theory handy when you're trying to counter actual events as, e.g., documented in the Senate Intel commitee's reports.
Click to expand...

LOL. We've had four years of conspiracy theories.
 
iguanaman said:
Well it was not the American people, he lost by nearly 3 million votes with them. Cambridge Analytica gave Trump the data to squeak out a win in the 3 blue States by targeting Bernie supporters and Manafort gave it to the Russians and Putin's trolls did the rest. The good news is this can NEVER happen twice.

Leaked: Cambridge Analytica's blueprint for Trump victory | UK news | The Guardian

The Trump-Bernie voters from 2016 are nearly non-existent now - CNNPolitics
Click to expand...

LOL. So, you get your news from The Guardian and CNN? That explains a lot.
 
HumblePi said:
How would you like it if anyone here described Melania Trump or Ivanka Kushner as a 'ho' ? Wouldn't you consider that to be uncalled for, untrue and despicable? But you don't have any problem whatsoever referring to a U.S. Senator as a 'ho'. This is a perfect example of what's happened to the Republican party. It has degenerated into a mass of people that have no respect for a woman, no respect for a US Senator, and no self-respect because if you can throw the term around so carelessly it only reflects on your own integrity, or rather, your lack of. I have honestly never seen a single democrat here or on any other forum that has stooped low enough to call any woman in Trump's administration or circle, a 'ho'.
Click to expand...

I don't know. If you go back and look at some of the first ladies early porn, that description may very well apply. A fine example for our young children.
 
Moderate Right said:
You can't prove that Russia changed even one vote. Not one.
Click to expand...

Just because you cant prove a crime does not mean it didn't happen. I know Trump supporters are stupid enough to think your way, but most Americans see it for what it is. Cheating in an election.
 
Practical said:
You will never see Trump and Biden on a debate stage together. Even the most ardent Biden supporter has to know that Joe isn't all there anymore. And given his history of gaffes, unless they provide him a translator which will state that what Joe just said is not what Joe meant, it won't happen. Similarly, his ardent supporters will congratulate and admire his ducking of the debates as further proof that he is ready for the big chair considering the foreign powers he will be dealing with would never lie or bend the truth to their advantage.

If you guys would just admit that he is an empty suit and that you are not voting for him, rather against Trump, we can put all this to bed.
Click to expand...

Not sure what difference it makes. Trump has to go. Joe will have plenty of great advisers that will keep things moving right along.
 
In case anybody needs a laugh,
the RNC 2020 speaker lineup includes:

KID ROCK
TED NUGENT
SCOTT BAIO
NICK SANDMANN (THE COVINGTON KID)
THE DEMON SPERM DOCTOR
MY PILLOW GUY
CEO OF GOYA
THE ST. LOUIS GUN BRANDISHING COUPLE
JON VOIGHT
DIAMOND & SILK
JAMES WOODS
THE BLACKS FOR TRUMP GUY
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
In case anybody needs a laugh,
the RNC 2020 speaker lineup includes:

KID ROCK
TED NUGENT
SCOTT BAIO
NICK SANDMANN (THE COVINGTON KID)
THE DEMON SPERM DOCTOR
MY PILLOW GUY
CEO OF GOYA
THE ST. LOUIS GUN BRANDISHING COUPLE
JON VOIGHT
DIAMOND & SILK
JAMES WOODS
THE BLACKS FOR TRUMP GUY
Click to expand...

Quite impressive, in a D list sort of way.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
In case anybody needs a laugh,
the RNC 2020 speaker lineup includes:

KID ROCK
TED NUGENT
SCOTT BAIO
NICK SANDMANN (THE COVINGTON KID)
THE DEMON SPERM DOCTOR
MY PILLOW GUY
CEO OF GOYA
THE ST. LOUIS GUN BRANDISHING COUPLE
JON VOIGHT
DIAMOND & SILK
JAMES WOODS
THE BLACKS FOR TRUMP GUY
Click to expand...

Awesome lineup, way way better than what the Dems fielded.
 
azgreg said:
You can say that about every prediction you have made.
Click to expand...

But it won't stop him. When it comes to Republican Scandal Mongering, they don't care how many rakes they step on, they just keep trudging through.
 
HumblePi said:
How would you like it if anyone here described Melania Trump or Ivanka Kushner as a 'ho' ? Wouldn't you consider that to be uncalled for, untrue and despicable? But you don't have any problem whatsoever referring to a U.S. Senator as a 'ho'. This is a perfect example of what's happened to the Republican party. It has degenerated into a mass of people that have no respect for a woman, no respect for a US Senator, and no self-respect because if you can throw the term around so carelessly it only reflects on your own integrity, or rather, your lack of. I have honestly never seen a single democrat here or on any other forum that has stooped low enough to call any woman in Trump's administration or circle, a 'ho'.
Click to expand...

In fairness, Melania is white. For her, it's pronounced whore. You know, like in the phrase, "She's a gold-digging whore of the mail-order variety". Then it makes sense.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
In case anybody needs a laugh,
the RNC 2020 speaker lineup includes:

KID ROCK
TED NUGENT
SCOTT BAIO
NICK SANDMANN (THE COVINGTON KID)
THE DEMON SPERM DOCTOR
MY PILLOW GUY
CEO OF GOYA
THE ST. LOUIS GUN BRANDISHING COUPLE
JON VOIGHT
DIAMOND & SILK
JAMES WOODS
THE BLACKS FOR TRUMP GUY
Click to expand...

Must miss TV. What a cast of losers and misfits.

Even the list of Republican insiders is a bit pathetic. I am surprised, however, that Joni Ernst chooses to lend her name to Trump this year. That could easily be the end of Senate career.

Even more surprising is Nikki Haley, the one person that got out of the Trump administration unscathed. Why would she come back and risk tarnishing her name? I guess she really isn't all that interested in being President one day.


PoS said:
Awesome lineup, way way better than what the Dems fielded.
Click to expand...

Glad you think so..... when no one wants to go to your party, its best to appreciate the few that will.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom