2020 Presidential Race

#92,702
#92,702
Orangeburst said:
Do you thiunk Dems did the same with all the Russian collusion?
Click to expand...
This is drawing a false equivalency of completely unrelated events. Hillary Clinton conceded defeat the day after the 2016 election. She gave a gracious concession speech in the process of admitting her defeat. She never once blamed her defeat on voter fraud, or cast aspersions on the United States system of elections. President Barack Obama immediately invited President-elect Donald Trump to the White House and offered to assist in the transition of power. There was even a photo op between the two men, which you normally see after elections... which we even saw in December of 2000... but we won't see this year.

There were investigations into Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election. These investigations concluded that Russia was responsible for hacking the DNC. A separate investigation uncovered the June 9, 2016 meeting at Trump Tower among 2016 Trump campaign manager, Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr. with several Russian officials including Natalia Veselnitskaya. Both Trump and Trump Jr. told lies about who was in attendance at this meeting and what was discussed. I have felt that these investigations were righteous and necessary. Ultimately, conclusions were reached that there was no provable collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia... and that's fine. It's also widely accepted that Russia's interference played no role in the outcome of the election... and that's fine too. Those investigations were still necessary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#92,704
#92,704
NorthDallas40 said:
Read some. I’ve been very clear I don’t think they will win. But they’ve got some play in mind and I haven’t figured it out. My best guess right now is it’s just tit for tat to get the right to play by the same rules of the last four years.
Click to expand...

Whether it’s serious or not, separate states bringing a lawsuit that doesn’t only try to invalidate illegal votes, but every single vote in 4 other states, is a dangerous precedent. I’m also not sure what it actually accomplishes other than appeasing an irrational voting base loyal to one man.
 
#92,705
#92,705
OHvol40 said:
Whether it’s serious or not, desperate states bringing a lawsuit that doesn’t only try to invalidate illegal votes, but every single vote in 4 other states, is a dangerous precedent. I’m also not sure what it actually accomplishes other than appeasing an irrational voting base loyal to one man.
Click to expand...
Ok. I don’t agree. But I’ll save the meme for now.
 
#92,706
#92,706
BowlBrother85 said:
This is drawing a false equivalency of completely unrelated events. Hillary Clinton conceded defeat the day after the 2016 election. She gave a gracious concession speech in the process of admitting her defeat. She never once blamed her defeat on voter fraud, or cast aspersions on the United States system of elections. President Barack Obama immediately invited President-elect Donald Trump to the White House and offered to assist in the transition of power. There was even a photo op between the two men, which you normally see after elections... which we even saw in December of 2000... but we won't see this year.

There were investigations into Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election. These investigations concluded that Russia was responsible for hacking the DNC. A separate investigation uncovered the June 9, 2016 meeting at Trump Tower among 2016 Trump campaign manager, Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr. with several Russian officials including Natalia Veselnitskaya. Both Trump and Trump Jr. told lies about who was in attendance at this meeting and what was discussed. I have felt that these investigations were righteous and necessary. Ultimately, conclusions were reached that there was no provable collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia... and that's fine. It's also widely accepted that Russia's interference played no role in the outcome of the election... and that's fine too. Those investigations were still necessary.
Click to expand...

Sorry...did not even read. Thanks for the long exerted effort
 
#92,710
#92,710
Stew Cook said:
Not sure.. maybe
Click to expand...

You would know. This is the key

shopping
 
#92,711
#92,711
BowlBrother85 said:
This is drawing a false equivalency of completely unrelated events. Hillary Clinton conceded defeat the day after the 2016 election. She gave a gracious concession speech in the process of admitting her defeat. She never once blamed her defeat on voter fraud, or cast aspersions on the United States system of elections. President Barack Obama immediately invited President-elect Donald Trump to the White House and offered to assist in the transition of power. There was even a photo op between the two men, which you normally see after elections... which we even saw in December of 2000... but we won't see this year.

There were investigations into Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election. These investigations concluded that Russia was responsible for hacking the DNC. A separate investigation uncovered the June 9, 2016 meeting at Trump Tower among 2016 Trump campaign manager, Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr. with several Russian officials including Natalia Veselnitskaya. Both Trump and Trump Jr. told lies about who was in attendance at this meeting and what was discussed. I have felt that these investigations were righteous and necessary. Ultimately, conclusions were reached that there was no provable collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia... and that's fine. It's also widely accepted that Russia's interference played no role in the outcome of the election... and that's fine too. Those investigations were still necessary.
Click to expand...
7769B26B-E9FA-4C39-9379-3AE614D4731A.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: loggervol
#92,721
#92,721
OHvol40 said:
Whether it’s serious or not, separate states bringing a lawsuit that doesn’t only try to invalidate illegal votes, but every single vote in 4 other states, is a dangerous precedent. I’m also not sure what it actually accomplishes other than appeasing an irrational voting base loyal to one man.
Click to expand...

It might accomplish enforcing the law.....omg...what a concept.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, NorthDallas40 and Orangeslice13
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top