If only that were true. In point of reality, the GOP has been a whiny pack of conspiracy theorists for decades now - and a force to be reckoned with, at the same time. Trump has exposed, not transformed, the GOP. And we're still waiting for the impotence consequences to kick in - If that didn't happen after the W administration fell apart so spectacularly, what are the odds a comparatively minor event like a solid Trump loss would do the trick?
LOL! The alt right conspiracy theory machine never stops churning out more and more bullshit, hoping anything might stick.
Indeed. I have maintained all along that Trump is a closet Democrat. If he wanted a Democrat in the oval office, he is getting it done in a most spectacular and effective fashion. In fact, he is on-record as saying he's going to "clear out the swamp in Washington". What better way to do that than taking control of one the two parties and plunging it headlong into the side of a mountain? Even the Repubs are saying this defeat will be felt for a generation or more.
This is much smaller, much less of a disaster, than the eight year rolling disaster of W&Cheney. And much more easily isolated, rhetorically. If that didn't kill the Republican Party, what could? We're stuck with this political faction for the foreseeable future. Trump's political base owns the Republican Party, regardless of what happens to Trump himself, and even if Trump loses come November - still by no means a sure thing - they will have Congressional, State, and considerable Judicial, power.
53% of republicans say they will accept the outcome of the "election". (borrowed): "With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, ... , to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations."
Bulptor, post: 3411192, member: 270768"]53% of republicans say they will accept the outcome of the "election". (borrowed): "With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, ... , to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations."[/QUOTE] What about the other 47%?
[QUOTE="joepistole, post: 3411194, member: 30319"53% of republicans say they will accept the outcome of the "election". (borrowed): [/QUOTE] What about the other 47%?[/QUOTE] as/re: What about the other 47%? indeed ergo: "(borrowed)"
The thing I can't figure out about that thesis, though, is the number of Republicans who hopped on↗. Among my notes from July, 2015: • Given the number of Republicans who have tacked to line up behind Donald Trump, it seems a difficult conspiracy theory to accept. Sen. Ted Cruz? Gov. Scott Walker? Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, and how about a professional conservative propagandist like Rich Lowry, editor of National Review? Watching them back Mr. Trump, one can reasonably wonder if Mr. Curbelo has thought his assertion through. Really? A Clintonian conspiracy including Cruz, Walker, Carson, Fiorina, and Lowry, among others, as participants? How does Rick Perry end up being the smart guy in the room? It really is the damnedest thing.
The reasonable person might ask, since Wikileaks confirmed much of the hypocrisy and corruption suspected of Hillary and the Democrats, why would anyone align behind Hillary with enthusiasm? I can see the establishment against Trump, if one judges him by his ego-centricity and foul mouth. But why is everyone aligning behind Hillary, if she has been proven to be a flawed and corrupt candidate? Why is corruption more acceptable than bad manners? The support Hillary is getting, in spite of corruption, gives me the sense that the current state of affairs, is better for those in power, than the prospect of change. Is this good for the people and country, or just those in power, who are manipulating the masses with misdirect? The analogy is a nonunion worker shows up on a union job. A nonunion worker is more independent and does not recite the union mantra. He will be difference, so many will dislike him, because he is not like the rest; non indoctrinated. The nonunion worker is used to being paid less and working harder. This difference in wage and work can make everyone look bad. The larger number of union workers on a job and their higher pay and benefits, is all contingent on a unified illusion that is being created. Therefore, for survival of the union, the nonunion guy needs to knocked him down a few notches. He is first told to slow down, and not make the rest look bad. If he refuses, he will be hazed, until he finally leaves. Trump has not paid his union dues, so to speak. He is not entitled to their extra benefits. Hillary has paid the dues, and is more deserving, since she is for the union, corrupt and all. Trump expects the fix to be in. When Hillary beat Bernie Sanders, the Democrats gave Hillary more super delegates, even with Bernie winning states. Hillary was able to cheat by the rules. Why is it out of the question something similar is in the works for the general election? Wikileaks shows the Democrats are willing to incite riots to win. The primaries were not an honest process for Bernie. He complained by eventually joined the union. If the Republicans are for Hillary, then they may be willing to look the other way, as the union protects itself by cheating. Each election cycle the Republicans try to close loopholes in the voter registration process, while the Democrats always oppose it. The Democrats wish to preserve the right to cheat. For example, there are lots of deceased people still on the election rolls, especially in Democratic states. The Democrats always fight against these dead voters being purged. The estimate is there are 4 million illegible people on the voter rolls. If the Republican establishment, knows this and looks the other way, Trump will need to fight this on his own. Trump has the money, but will be hard to reverse an election, after the Democrats assumer power, and assign their own people to the Justice Department and Supreme Court.
online mutual betting is offering 9/2 odds for Trump, and 2/11 odds for Clinton. You can also vote on % voter turnout---currently the range 54% - 58% seems to be the most popular(lowest odds). If you like point spreads, you can also bet on the electoral college spreads. Interestingly, while 71 percent of the money being bet favored Clinton, 65 percent of the people who have placed bets have indicated that they think Trump will pull off a victory on Nov. 8. (I do not gamble, but find the odds interesting.)
The Wikileaks Delusion Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Let's see ... politicians have public and private positions. The White House is a long way from the average middle class upbringing. And as Matt Yglesias↱ put it: "You'd think hosting the 5th Fleet would be enough to buy Bahrain 'access' to the Secretary of State but I guess it took that donation.". The reasonable person might actually ask why conservatives are unable to discuss reality in realistic terms. Handicapping a round of golf is considerably less consequential than spotting you a few lies as truth at the outset. Stop being harmful to your fellow human being; your false witness is an atrocity. ____________________ Notes: Yglesias, Matt. "You'd think hosting the 5th Fleet would be enough to buy Bahrain 'access' to the Secretary of State but I guess it took that donation". Twitter. 26 August 2016. Twitter.com. 24 October 2016. http://bit.ly/2d7JKb8
Problem is, we aren't allowed to shoot the non-signatories. That simplified things. Lincoln was not faced with the prospect of the Confederacy having a majority of the House, or the Confederates insisting on keeping their slaves regardless of how the war came out.
The 4 million number is somewhat misleading as to its significance: yes, 4 million names may still be on the voter registration lists, but no, 4 million wrongful votes will not be cast in their names. Per an analysis in Nassau County, where it was reports that there were 6,000 deceased people on the voter rolls, they discovered 270 cases of the dead voting. But this was over a 20 year period. Yes, there was apparently one person who vote 14 times since he had died, but most cases, per the study, seemed to be people dying after voting, incorrect assigning of a genuine vote to a deceased person (with same name etc), or other clerical errors, rather than any actual fraud. But yes, there were some cases. Feel free to take the headline-grabbing numbers at face value, though, if it helps fuel your sense of Trump as likely victim of such grand fraud. The reality, however...
Because the wikileaks releases do not really show anything worrying. You talk about "corruption" all the time, but you never provide a single specific reference. Well, you seem to know as little about unions as everything else. Studies show that workers in a union tend to be more productive than workers not in a union. But did Sanders win enough states to win if there were no superdelegates? Or did he not win enough states? That might actually be relevant. How does a union protect itself by cheating? A union protects itself by delivering. Unions have provided incredible benefits to even non-union workers; as the USA proved by enacting legislation to dismantle unions and then decimating the earnings of all workers in the USA. Yes, because as courts show, these Republican laws are racist, they literally target black people and other minorities. You are cherry picking your information here. Please produce one example of this. Please find a study that supports this claim and produces an estimate of its actual impact.
Except, Wikileaks hasn't confirmed either the alleged corruption or hypocrisy of Hilary or Democrats at large...oops. The Wikileaks documents haven't even been confirmed as truthful. A number of them have been proved to be falsified by Russian sources. Unfortunately, for you and those like you facts do matter. Non union workers are generally paid the same as union workers if they work for the same employer. You have no evidence that the "non union" guy is knocked down or hazed by union guys not to mention the fact your analogy simply isn't appropriate. Unions have nothing at all to do with Wikileaks...oops. Except Hilary didn't "cheat by the rules". How is that even possible? The weird thing is you never see anything contradictory or absurd in your beliefs. It doesn't matter to you that you contradict yourself even in the same sentence. Again, the unfortunate fact for you is Hilary won the majority of elected delegates. Bernie didn't. There was no cheating or evidence of cheating in the Democratic primaries. Voting isn't a loophole. It's a constitutionally protected right. That's one of the key differences between Republicans and Democrats. As demonstrated by your post, Republicans believe voting is a loophole. Unfortunately for Republicans voting isn't a loophole nor is it a cheat. It's the foundation of our democracy. Yes, there are millions of dead people on American voter rolls, but you do realize millions of Americans die every year? So it's not unexpected or nefarious to find millions dead Americans on voter rolls. By the way, the Pew Foundation, found there are more than 1.8 million dead people listed on voter rolls. There is no evidence for the 4 million number you have asserted. Given 2.6 million Americans die every year, 1.8 a pretty good number. I would have expected a larger number. Additionally, people move each year, I have moved a number of times, and I'm sure I was listed as a registered voter more than one voting precinct at the same time. Because whenever I moved, I registered to vote at my new address but I never bothered to update my previous registration. I'm not even sure of the process for doing that. I have never seen a form to update my voter registration or to notify voting authorities of an address change. But I have never once committed voter fraud, and I have never cast more than on vote in any election. There are inaccuracies in American voter rolls, but that doesn't mean dead people are voting or people are fraudulently voting in significant numbers. Regardless of the facts Republicans have used errors in voter registration records to illegal purge legitimate voters from the voting rolls (e.g. Florida 2000) with the intent to prevent duly registered voters from voting in order to advantage the Republican Party. Republicans have continually tried and with much success make voting more difficult and in the process have disenfranchised millions of Americans.
Corrupt or otherwise agenda motivated State officials denying citizens their entitled vote, miscounting or undercounting their votes, purging them from the registration rolls, breaking or removing their voting machines and polling places, manipulating their cast vote in ways set up to confuse, and so forth, is far more serious electoral fraud than somebody voting under a dead person's name for some reason - even deliberately, which is a felony. And those kinds of abuses have been documented on a large scale, capable of throwing entire Statewide elections, in several States of the US.
Oh, then perhaps you can show us that documentation? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Sure. Or you could bother to catch up on the standard lefty news and discussion stuff for the past twenty years, as would do you good. Did you really miss, for example, the mess in Florida in 2000? the tens of thousands of voters "mistakenly" purged from Florida voter roles, most of them likely Democratic voters? a Republican administration that also misprinted a large number of ballots, all of which ended up in heavily Democratic districts? And purchased, installed, and maintained a large number of touchscreen voting machines without paper trails whose final tallies produced a slew of statistical oddities all of which favored the Republican Presidential candidate? You missed all of that? Slip your mind?
