5 ms·
Oh, stop. I don't like Hillary, but Trump says he'll contest a loss. That's what actual subversion of the process looks like. Everything you're bringing up is p
by pfraze 10y ago
Oh, stop. I don't like Hillary, but Trump says he'll contest a loss. That's what actual subversion of the process looks like. Everything you're bringing up is politics.
> Hillary intentionally subverted the democratic process by having the DNC work against Sanders.
Getting elected is a process of building key supporters, including within your own party.
> We have concrete evidence of her working with one of her PACs
All candidates do, and use some level of indirection to stay within the regulation. The regulation is toothless for campaign finance reform, so why get worked up about it.
> She has Obama, using tax payer money, campaigning for her
Outgoing presidents always campaign on behalf of their party's nominee.
- luxuryballs 10y agoHe didn't say he would contest a loss, he said he wouldn't make a decision until the election actually took place. How anyone expects someone to predict the future is beyond me and the logic of the question shows that it was totally a trap so they could write sensational news headlines.
- swissoak 10y agoExactly. The anti-Trump hyperbole is ridiculous and ruins any credibility people have when attacking him.
- pfraze 10y agoPlease! Your interpretation of "I'll keep you in suspense" only makes sense if you strip the context. The question of concession was only asked because, he's been claiming the election is rigged. So that question of concession, translated to include the context, was, "Ok Donald, are you really going to claim to the nation that the elections are rigged, and that you won't accept their results?" And his, answer was, "We'll see." Which means, yes! He's standing by the claim. So don't equivocate Trump's position. It's not media sensationalism.
- swissoak 10y agoObama called it rigged in 2008.
- cpr 10y agoYep: https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4625800/obama-rigged-elections-2008 https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4625800/obama-rigged-election...
- makomk 10y agoBoth Clinton and her supporters have been rather obviously laying the groundwork to challenge the results if they lose with claims about Russia hacking election systems and conspiring to support Trump. (I'm still not sure how having a list of voters is meant to help Russia with this if casting fake votes is really that hard, but never mind - this election is post-truth anyway.) The real difference is there's no chance in hell she'd be stupid enough to admit that.
- tropo 10y agoGore contested his loss. Was that actual subversion of the process? If the election is close, I think the loser has a duty to contest the loss. Trump contesting the election would be every bit as right as Gore contesting the election. What is so bad about this? The reaction people are having is strange. It's as if people are purposely misinterpreting Trump's words as implying that he will march on Washington D.C. with a militia. The realistic assumption is a Gore-style lawsuit, and there is nothing wrong with that.
- pfraze 10y agoI agree with you, to a point. Gore's case was uniquely bad, and I'm not convinced it wasn't fraud, personally. But he made the challenge after there was evidence of fraud; he didn't lead up to the election hinting that any potential loss is due to a rigged vote.
- fny 10y agoThere's no comparing Trump to Gore. Gore did not so brazenly claim the election was rigged prior to voting, and he did concede after the recount. Also he never claimed universal fraud, just issues with the Florida result alone. In the end, he lost by only 537 votes in Florida. [0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_election_recount https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_election_recount
- swissoak 10y agoGore himself has said, after lots of investigation, he is confident Bush won the electoral vote of Florida.