Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Grand Unified Election Thread 2: What is the difference between Biden and Dump?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by SJHovey View Post

    Yeah, it's not like anyone on the left claimed that the Russians stole the election for Trump in 2016.
    This is utter garbage. While a small subset might have argued the election was "stolen" the primary and most pervasive argument was that it was unduly influenced. Regardless Hillary conceded the next day and there were was nary a movement to attempt to invalidate the results.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by WeAreNDHockey View Post

      As usual, someone from the the right makes a false equivalency argument. You did not have reams of democrats screaming for weeks on end the Russians stole the election. The things we said here were that Russians influenced the narrative, which was absolutely and demonstrably true. No where do I recall the losing candidate in 2016 crying for days about how she lost because of theft and fraud. There were concessions and people moved on. You have the vast majority of the entire republican party spending weeks saying this election was fraudulent and might be overturned. There is NO comparison between how Democrats behaved in 2016 and how republicans are behaving in 2020. Unless you are a liar.
      Your claim that Dems in 2016 were like, "oh well, thems the breaks. If HRC had only campaigned smarter, we'd have won" is complete nonsense. It is true the Dems turned on HRC. But you and the rest of them here claimed the Russians stole the election, James Comey stole the election, the GOP suppressed the vote and stole the election, etc...

      To sit here today and claim your position was more nuanced, that your argument was only that the Russians "influenced the narrative", gives me a good chuckle.

      That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

      Comment


      • jfc
        **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

        Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
        Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Slap Shot View Post

          This is utter garbage. While a small subset might have argued the election was "stolen" the primary and most pervasive argument was that it was unduly influenced. Regardless Hillary conceded the next day and there were was nary a movement to attempt to invalidate the results.
          There wasn't an attempt by Hillary to overturn the election. I don't claim there was. I don't claim she did anything inappropriate. I don't even defend Trump for his actions, which I regard has foolish, futile, a huge waste of time, a huge waste of money, and not helpful at all for the country.

          I should also note, I did not, and since 2016 have not, come here and complained about Democrats whining about Comey or whining about the Russians or anything else. It's a free country, I have no objection to them complaining about it.

          But NDHockey has posted a lot of nonsense on this board over the last month, including his ongoing claim that we're about to see a Civil War II. When he comes in and says that Democrats took the 2016 loss with nary a peep, that's just silly.
          That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

          Comment


          • No one is saying Democrats were happy in 2016, but they certainly didn’t try to stop the transition. It’s ridiculous for the GOP to try to compare the two.
            Originally posted by BobbyBrady
            Crosby probably wouldn't even be on BC's top two lines next year

            Comment


            • Originally posted by WeAreNDHockey View Post
              And as for the electoral college, it is wrong because if favors small populations, not because it favors a party. Right now though it clearly favors the republicans, and THAT is why they are opposed to abolishing it. As soon as it moves in another direction they will be all for getting rid of it. Stupid question, but do republicans EVER tire of their own hypocrisy?
              Yeah, when it moves in the other direction, there will be Republicans arguing we should get rid of it, while Democrats will become strangely silent on the topic.

              That is why, by the way, that professional politicians in Washington don't fall into the trap that the citizenry does. They understand that one day you may be in power, the next day you may not.
              That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by WeAreNDHockey View Post
                And as for the electoral college, it is wrong because if favors small populations, not because it favors a party. Right now though it clearly favors the republicans, and THAT is why they are opposed to abolishing it. As soon as it moves in another direction they will be all for getting rid of it. Stupid question, but do republicans EVER tire of their own hypocrisy?
                The Bush campaign had prepared a strategy to fight an electoral college loss (by pushing electors from states to go with the winner of the national popular vote). They were also preparing on a media campaign to turn people against the electoral college. They had thought it was more likely that Bush would win the popular vote and lose the electoral college than the other way around.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Drew S. View Post
                  No one is saying Democrats were happy in 2016, but they certainly didn’t try to stop the transition. It’s ridiculous for the GOP to try to compare the two.
                  I'm not even talking about the transition.

                  For all the whining, pearl clutching and gnashing of teeth that's going on, what is going to happen is exactly what I said is going to happen. A majority of the electors will cast their ballot for Biden. Congress will affirm that in January, and on 1/20/21, Joe Biden will be sworn in as POTUS. That's what is going to happen.

                  There will be no civil war. There will be no call to the military to remove Trump. There will be no constitutional crisis.

                  Here is what there will be. Biden will have an inauguration that will be quite small, so as to remove some risk of spread of Covid, and Trump will brag about how his inauguration was much larger than Biden's.
                  That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Spartanforlife4 View Post
                    https://twitter.com/randyrrquaid/sta...082409474?s=21

                    Here’s a very normal thing for the leader of a country to retweet.

                    Yes, he actually shared this.
                    Cocaine. It's a helluva drug.
                    Cornell University
                    National Champion 1967, 1970
                    ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                    Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post
                      They'll hook you up.
                      This is the perfect way to put it. Well done.
                      Cornell University
                      National Champion 1967, 1970
                      ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                      Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                        Yeah, it's not like anyone on the left claimed that the Russians stole the election for Trump in 2016.
                        We claimed they intervened with cyber attacks to influence the outcome. Dump's own administration confirmed it.

                        The party you apologize for tried to overturn an election. They're fascists and you're either an unwitting chump or a witting jerk for covering for them.

                        You lost. F-ck your feelings.



                        Last edited by Kepler; 11-24-2020, 12:11 PM.
                        Cornell University
                        National Champion 1967, 1970
                        ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                        Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by alfablue

                          The problem with the Electoral College is that it's biases toward small population states.
                          The workaround is to expand the house 3- or 5-fold, thereby reducing the influence of the senate in the EC.

                          Right now California gets 55 EVs to Wyoming's 3.

                          Go to 1500 seats, and it probably gets to about 250 - 5. (there's a fairly easy way to calculate it officially, but my excel skills are not up to par at the moment)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by FadeToBlack&Gold View Post
                            LOL. They try, oh how they try.

                            Politico, RCP, the Hill, CNN, WaPo, NYT. All playing the same old game. Never mind that we came 50 IQ points from losing our democracy, there's a cliche narrative to peddle!
                            Cornell University
                            National Champion 1967, 1970
                            ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                            Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Kepler View Post

                              We claimed they intervened with cyber attacks to influence the outcome. Dump's own administration confirmed it.

                              The party you apologize for tried to overturn an election. They're fascists and you're either an unwitting chump or a witting jerk for covering for them.
                              Why not both?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by SJHovey View Post


                                But NDHockey has posted a lot of nonsense on this board over the last month, including his ongoing claim that we're about to see a Civil War II. When he comes in and says that Democrats took the 2016 loss with nary a peep, that's just silly.
                                I have said more than once I look forward to coming on here and eating crow if there is no coup we don't devolve into civil war. I am more than willing to admit when I am wrong. Unlike you and virtually every other person of your political persuasion.

                                And anytime I have commented about how I think something may have been stolen from various democrats I provide context. I link to articles that purport to show how voter suppression tactics cost candidates votes in places like Wisconsin in 2016. I comment about things that have been excepted by literally everyone who is not a mouth breathing idiot, like Russian influence on the elections in 2016. Nowhere will you find a post by me that said, for instance, Russians stole or changed votes. Because it probably didn't happen, and there is no credible evidence it did. For 3 weeks now, your entire party, with exceptions I can count on my hands, has claimed things about the election that there is no evidence of, and in fact are not true. You have the president's media mouthpiece spouting stool sample about how Hillary never conceded and trump was not afforded a smooth transition. All lies. I don't lie. I'm wrong sometimes, and when wrong, I'll admit it. The next time someone of your ilk admits a mistake it will probably be the first time. That, and the hypocrisy, are the things that are so sickening about your side, and mainly why this country is in the fix it is in.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X