Donald Trump

"

Antnee wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

Can you blame them though? The dem primary was actively rigged for Hillary. I'd be suspicious too. I agree it can be dangerous (muh civil war) but it's a valid concern.

First of all, the Dem primary was not rigged. You're talking shit, pulled from the asshole of the internet: Breitbart. Stop.

I say the following as someone who really wanted Bernie to win:

There was favoritism and typical politicking. He entered as a Democrat, after a lifelong stint as an independent. He waltzed in, and expected to be treated by the party leaders the same as HRC, who's been active in her party for decades? Come the fuck on, dude. That is a far, far cry from rigging.

He lost, and lost badly. Wanna cry "rigged"? Show me vote manipulation. Tell me how extensive the fuckery would have to be in order to propel Hillary to that much of a victory. It's an absurd notion.

So no, it is not a valid concern. He's inventing controversy because his ego will not allow him to lose unless its illegitimate. Words mean things, and "rigged" is not a word you use to describe our elections unless you live in a goddamned fantasy world.

From the DNC bylaws: "The Chairperson shall be responsible for ensuring that the national officers and staff of the Democratic National Committee maintain impartiality and evenhandedness during the Democratic Party Presidential nominating process." Not only did they discuss how to smear Bernie, they also colluded with the media. If you're fine with corruption then I guess Hillary is a great candidate, but don't be surprised when other people don't trust her.

Btw exit polls are good indicators for vote manipulation. They were off by a mile several times during the dem primaries.

"

Xavderion wrote:

Btw exit polls are good indicators for vote manipulation. They were off by a mile several times during the dem primaries.

No, they don't. This is so important that anyone saying this should be rigurous as fuck.

Reality is that there are sore losers (like Sanders followers), and Trump may end being the biggest one.

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

Antnee wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

Can you blame them though? The dem primary was actively rigged for Hillary. I'd be suspicious too. I agree it can be dangerous (muh civil war) but it's a valid concern.

First of all, the Dem primary was not rigged. You're talking shit, pulled from the asshole of the internet: Breitbart. Stop.

I say the following as someone who really wanted Bernie to win:

There was favoritism and typical politicking. He entered as a Democrat, after a lifelong stint as an independent. He waltzed in, and expected to be treated by the party leaders the same as HRC, who's been active in her party for decades? Come the fuck on, dude. That is a far, far cry from rigging.

He lost, and lost badly. Wanna cry "rigged"? Show me vote manipulation. Tell me how extensive the fuckery would have to be in order to propel Hillary to that much of a victory. It's an absurd notion.

So no, it is not a valid concern. He's inventing controversy because his ego will not allow him to lose unless its illegitimate. Words mean things, and "rigged" is not a word you use to describe our elections unless you live in a goddamned fantasy world.

From the DNC bylaws: "The Chairperson shall be responsible for ensuring that the national officers and staff of the Democratic National Committee maintain impartiality and evenhandedness during the Democratic Party Presidential nominating process." Not only did they discuss how to smear Bernie, they also colluded with the media. If you're fine with corruption then I guess Hillary is a great candidate, but don't be surprised when other people don't trust her.

Btw exit polls are good indicators for vote manipulation. They were off by a mile several times during the dem primaries.

You completely ignored my point.

Nothing you just described is rigging. Did I say that what they did was ethical? No, I did not. It's to be expected by anyone with a couple brain cells to rub together. Party politics is a nasty, personal business. We all know this, yet every 4 years or so, the losing side collectively forgets it.

That pearl-clutching is ridiculously ingenuine.

And no, I'm not "fine" with corruption. I fully expect I will vote against Hillary in 4 years. However, Trump is so far beyond the pale at this point, I'd sooner vote for Nixon's reanimated corpse than see him get within 50 feet of the oval office.

He, and his ilk, need to be swept right back under the fridge.

"

Antnee wrote:

You completely ignored my point.

Nothing you just described is rigging. Did I say that what they did was ethical? No, I did not. It's to be expected by anyone with a couple brain cells to rub together. Party politics is a nasty, personal business. We all know this, yet every 4 years or so, the losing side collectively forgets it.

That pearl-clutching is ridiculously ingenuine.

And no, I'm not "fine" with corruption. I fully expect I will vote against Hillary in 4 years. However, Trump is so far beyond the pale at this point, I'd sooner vote for Nixon's reanimated corpse than see him get within 50 feet of the oval office.

He, and his ilk, need to be swept right back under the fridge.

Hey, we're discussing semantics again. The same way 90% lying isn't outright lying, corruption and collusion isn't outright rigging. I get it. Luckily for Trump, most people don't care for semantics.

Why did so many DNC people resign when the emails were leaked if there was no favoritism of Hillary?

They never gave Bernie equal footing, they did not treat him as an equal, they made Hillary their shoe in; they rigged everything they possibly could to ensure that Bernie did not usurp Hillary.

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

Antnee wrote:

You completely ignored my point.

Nothing you just described is rigging. Did I say that what they did was ethical? No, I did not. It's to be expected by anyone with a couple brain cells to rub together. Party politics is a nasty, personal business. We all know this, yet every 4 years or so, the losing side collectively forgets it.

That pearl-clutching is ridiculously ingenuine.

And no, I'm not "fine" with corruption. I fully expect I will vote against Hillary in 4 years. However, Trump is so far beyond the pale at this point, I'd sooner vote for Nixon's reanimated corpse than see him get within 50 feet of the oval office.

He, and his ilk, need to be swept right back under the fridge.

Hey, we're discussing semantics again. The same way 90% lying isn't outright lying, corruption and collusion isn't outright rigging. I get it. Luckily for Trump, most people don't care for semantics.

https://youtu.be/_NcuhEcrM4w

Carlin uses the word "rigged" in this clip. Does anyone here have a semantics issue with the way it's used by Carlin? No? Didn't think so.

Bernie vs Clinton was rigged. He never had a legitimate hope of victory or even the good faith of his party. There's no way he would have gotten past the DNC's superdelegates, if it ever came to that. It didn't come to that... so what? That doesn't make it less rigged; it merely means that said rigging turned out to be a precaution rather than a necessity. The American public, once again, have proven themselves unworthy opponents against the corrupt elite; Hilary and Co. were actually overestimating us. Didn't even need Plan B.

"They don't give a fuck about you" is very relevant, because Bernie and Trump both make people believe that they actually do give a fuck about them. That's the key thing that makes those guys different from Hillary and say Cruz.

In Trump's case, it's probably only an appearance. But that's been the Republican strategy for years - lure in the libertarian vote were promised of smaller government and laugh all the way to the bank.

Both candidates are horrible. But if my choices are "mentally unhinged narcissist who might start a world war" or "continued status quo of the rich fucking this country and eroding liberty," then unfortunately the former is the better gamble. Precisely because he might, just maybe, do something dangerously stupid. More likely not, of course; I'm not expecting much.

In other words, the way I see it is: we are choosing who is going to fuck us. The government isn't your friend, it's the friend of special interests, the friend of the corrupt owners; it's the enemy of liberty, the enemy of your life and goals and dreams. Do you want the sane enemy, or the crazy enemy? Trump is the lesser evil - not in the sense normally used, but in the sense of more likely to fuck up.

Well, I think, anyway. I guess there's an argument H is worse, therefore better.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

Antnee wrote:

You completely ignored my point.

Nothing you just described is rigging. Did I say that what they did was ethical? No, I did not. It's to be expected by anyone with a couple brain cells to rub together. Party politics is a nasty, personal business. We all know this, yet every 4 years or so, the losing side collectively forgets it.

That pearl-clutching is ridiculously ingenuine.

And no, I'm not "fine" with corruption. I fully expect I will vote against Hillary in 4 years. However, Trump is so far beyond the pale at this point, I'd sooner vote for Nixon's reanimated corpse than see him get within 50 feet of the oval office.

He, and his ilk, need to be swept right back under the fridge.

Hey, we're discussing semantics again. The same way 90% lying isn't outright lying, corruption and collusion isn't outright rigging. I get it. Luckily for Trump, most people don't care for semantics.

https://youtu.be/_NcuhEcrM4w

Carlin uses the word "rigged" in this clip. Does anyone here have a semantics issue with the way it's used by Carlin? No? Didn't think so.

Bernie vs Clinton was rigged. He never had a legitimate hope of victory or even the good faith of his party. There's no way he would have gotten past the DNC's superdelegates, if it ever came to that. It didn't come to that... so what? That doesn't make it less rigged; it merely means that said rigging turned out to be a precaution rather than a necessity. The American public, once again, have proven themselves unworthy opponents against the corrupt elite; Hilary and Co. were actually overestimating us. Didn't even need Plan B.

Egh, fine. For the sake of moving things forward, the DNC was "rigged". (and I'm using those quotes as hard as I possibly can)

The context is still extremely important. There was no vote manipulation there- Trump is implying that this will happen in the general. There was no cheating during the conventions- Trump says that is the only way he loses Pennsylvania.

THAT is the issue here. He's convincing a large swath of the electorate that their vote will not be counted, and the election itself is a farce. Please tell me you understand how goddamn reckless that is!