3 ms·

Both the 2016 and 2020 elections were widely disputed by Democrats and Republicans respectively. Recall that the Democrats broadly alleged that the 2016 electio

Both the 2016 and 2020 elections were widely disputed by Democrats and Republicans respectively. Recall that the Democrats broadly alleged that the 2016 election was a Russian conspiracy, and "not my president" was a Democratic slogan that endured throughout Trump's presidency.

spywaregorilla 4y ago
Not my president did not mean he was falsely elected, it was that they found him repulsive.
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  Kind of hard to believe when the same people are muttering about Russian collusion. Same deal when Republicans were saying "not my president" in 2020 while also muttering about election fraud.
  - spywaregorilla 4y ago
    It's actually very easy to believe. Because you can talk to people and have them explain their views.
    - throwaway894345 4y ago
      Right, and many of them (on both sides) argue that they believe the election was illegitimate. This isn't complicated. :)
      - spywaregorilla 4y ago
        False equivalence
        throwaway894345 4y ago
        Nope
        spywaregorilla 4y ago
lalaland1125 4y ago
Hillary literally conceded the day after the election. Has Trump ever admitted that he lost?
- JustSomeNobody 4y ago
  Sorta by accident: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJvQHVlkpPI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJvQHVlkpPI About 11 or 12 seconds in.
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  The original claim was that only one party has issues accepting election results, thus arguing about Hillary versus Trump's individual behavior is moving the goalposts. Moreover, while Hillary conceded the election officially, she still occasionally claims the election "was stolen from her". "But Hillary's election denial is better than Trump's!" <- I quite agree, but the original claim was that one party accepts election results and the other doesn't which is clearly not true.
  - lalaland1125 4y ago
    I don't think it's moving the goalposts to look at the direct leadership of the political parties and their actions. Hillary and Trump aren't just random individuals. > But Hillary's election denial is better than Trump's! But Hillary isn't engaging in election denial, or really any denial. It's a verified fact that Russia leaked hacked material in order to hurt Hillary's campaign and portions of the Trump campaign colluded with that Russian effort. You can call it bad behavior to bring up old complaints (due to effects on partisanship, etc), but Hillary isn't engaging in any denial. IMHO the real people who are in denial about 2016 are the ones who still don't think Russia worked to sink Hillary with hacked material even after the criminal convictions and bipartisan Senate report.
    - throwaway894345 4y ago
      > I don't think it's moving the goalposts to look at the direct leadership of the political parties and their actions. Hillary and Trump aren't just random individuals. They aren't random individuals, but just because Hillary conceded the election on one occasion doesn't refute the many documented instances in which she and others in her party (at all levels of leadership) alleged or heavily implied the election was stolen. > But Hillary isn't engaging in election denial, or really any denial. It's a verified fact that Russia leaked hacked material in order to hurt Hillary's campaign and portions of the Trump campaign colluded with that Russian effort. It absolutely is election denial to allege or imply that the election was stolen, as Hillary has done many times over the intervening years, even if you believe there is good reason to deny the election results. Specifically, the original claim was that one party accepts election results and the other party does not--if you agree that some significant number of Democrats believed in Russian collusion even if there was collusion and that some significant number of Republicans believe the 2020 election was stolen even if it was stolen then you necessarily agree that the original claim (that one party accepts election results and the other does not) is false. You perhaps agree that the Democrats' election denial is better than the Republicans', but there is no room for disagreement that neither party accepts election results.
tootallgavin 4y ago
and the election of 2002
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

spywaregorilla 4y ago

Not my president did not mean he was falsely elected, it was that they found him repulsive.

throwaway894345 4y ago
Kind of hard to believe when the same people are muttering about Russian collusion. Same deal when Republicans were saying "not my president" in 2020 while also muttering about election fraud.
- spywaregorilla 4y ago
  It's actually very easy to believe. Because you can talk to people and have them explain their views.
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    Right, and many of them (on both sides) argue that they believe the election was illegitimate. This isn't complicated. :)
    - spywaregorilla 4y ago
      False equivalence
      - throwaway894345 4y ago
        Nope
        spywaregorilla 4y ago

lalaland1125 4y ago

Hillary literally conceded the day after the election. Has Trump ever admitted that he lost?

JustSomeNobody 4y ago
Sorta by accident: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJvQHVlkpPI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJvQHVlkpPI About 11 or 12 seconds in.
throwaway894345 4y ago
The original claim was that only one party has issues accepting election results, thus arguing about Hillary versus Trump's individual behavior is moving the goalposts. Moreover, while Hillary conceded the election officially, she still occasionally claims the election "was stolen from her". "But Hillary's election denial is better than Trump's!" <- I quite agree, but the original claim was that one party accepts election results and the other doesn't which is clearly not true.
- lalaland1125 4y ago
  I don't think it's moving the goalposts to look at the direct leadership of the political parties and their actions. Hillary and Trump aren't just random individuals. > But Hillary's election denial is better than Trump's! But Hillary isn't engaging in election denial, or really any denial. It's a verified fact that Russia leaked hacked material in order to hurt Hillary's campaign and portions of the Trump campaign colluded with that Russian effort. You can call it bad behavior to bring up old complaints (due to effects on partisanship, etc), but Hillary isn't engaging in any denial. IMHO the real people who are in denial about 2016 are the ones who still don't think Russia worked to sink Hillary with hacked material even after the criminal convictions and bipartisan Senate report.
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    > I don't think it's moving the goalposts to look at the direct leadership of the political parties and their actions. Hillary and Trump aren't just random individuals. They aren't random individuals, but just because Hillary conceded the election on one occasion doesn't refute the many documented instances in which she and others in her party (at all levels of leadership) alleged or heavily implied the election was stolen. > But Hillary isn't engaging in election denial, or really any denial. It's a verified fact that Russia leaked hacked material in order to hurt Hillary's campaign and portions of the Trump campaign colluded with that Russian effort. It absolutely is election denial to allege or imply that the election was stolen, as Hillary has done many times over the intervening years, even if you believe there is good reason to deny the election results. Specifically, the original claim was that one party accepts election results and the other party does not--if you agree that some significant number of Democrats believed in Russian collusion even if there was collusion and that some significant number of Republicans believe the 2020 election was stolen even if it was stolen then you necessarily agree that the original claim (that one party accepts election results and the other does not) is false. You perhaps agree that the Democrats' election denial is better than the Republicans', but there is no room for disagreement that neither party accepts election results.

tootallgavin 4y ago

and the election of 2002

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]