Trump assails recount push, claims millions voted illegally

[atyclb]

because of the electoral college, candidates strategy is to win the required number of electoral college votes and not the popular vote. for sure hillary would have been extremely happy had the outcome-situation been reversed

[Morch]

I could be wrong, but aren't don't most of the illegal immigrants reside in states won by HRC? For example, given that there was little doubt California would go to the Dems, with or without the alleged illegals voting,  what would be the point of risking everything in order to vote?

[Morch]

21 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I know that's the "lesser of two evils" rationalization but I don't buy it. If you do you'll find two more, even worse candidates in the next election.

 

Not sure how the two sentences connect. Would voting for fringe independent candidate change things? Would belief in the merits of the candidate voted for change his qualities or those standing for election next time?

[Time Traveller]

Not sure how anyone could argue against Trump on this. As long as states like California and New York refuse to have Voter ID laws, then no one will ever know how many people voted illegally. But I know one thing, it's got to be a lot.

[Anthony5]

27 minutes ago, Morch said:

I could be wrong, but aren't don't most of the illegal immigrants reside in states won by HRC? For example, given that there was little doubt California would go to the Dems, with or without the alleged illegals voting,  what would be the point of risking everything in order to vote?

 

Then of course the question is, WHY is there so little doubt that Hilary will win the states with all the illegal immigrants.

 

 

[Morch]

 

 

Trying to back one conspiracy with another?

[iReason]

Just now, Time Traveller said:

As long as states like California and New York refuse to have Voter ID laws, then no one will ever know how many people voted illegally.

But I know one thing, it's got to be a lot.

 

No one will ever know.

 

But you do.

 

Step up and provde your proof of that BS, unsubtantiated erroneous statement.

 

Another Trumpeteer just making stuff up...

 

[Andaman Al]

So not only are Mexicans rapists, murderers and drug dealers they are all also very very stupid.

 

Risking their lives, all the money they had and incarceration, they fled over the border, have set themselves up working illegally so that they can live a better life, they keep themselves 'grey' to ensure they do not attract attention to themselves, THEN they risk it all so they can break their cover and go out on masse, risking a felony crime and VOTE in a political election. If you believe this then not even a tin foil hat can protect you, you are simply too far gone.

[Time Traveller]

17 minutes ago, iReason said:

 

No one will ever know.

 

But you do.

 

Step up and provde your proof of that BS, unsubtantiated erroneous statement.

 

Another Trumpeteer just making stuff up...

 

Human behavior is my proof. If there is no one there to enforce the law, then people will take advantage.

Imagine if police no longer patrolled highways and didn't bother with speed cameras and traffic monitoring anymore......are you really that naive to think everyone would drive at the speed limit ?  Did you not see the undercover video of Alan Schulkin admitting to widespread electoral fraud?

[Andaman Al]

2 minutes ago, Time Traveller said:

Human behavior is my proof. If there is no one there to enforce the law, then people will take advantage.

Imagine if police no longer patrolled highways and didn't bother with speed cameras and traffic monitoring anymore......are you really that naive to think everyone would drive at the speed limit ?  

A ridiculous analogy and does not explain why an illegal who has made it to the USA would risk incarceration to vote in an election that will not make one iota difference to their lives other than risk the total destruction of what they have fought to get. Seems your knowledge of human behaviour needs a serious upgrade.

[Anthony5]

11 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

So not only are Mexicans rapists, murderers and drug dealers they are all also very very stupid.

 

Risking their lives, all the money they had and incarceration, they fled over the border, have set themselves up working illegally so that they can live a better life, they keep themselves 'grey' to ensure they do not attract attention to themselves, THEN they risk it all so they can break their cover and go out on masse, risking a felony crime and VOTE in a political election. If you believe this then not even a tin foil hat can protect you, you are simply too far gone.

 

Illegals don't vote because they want to vote, they vote because they get paid for it. ll part of getting that better life.

 

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, Anthony5 said:

 

Illegals don't vote because they want to vote, they vote because they get paid for it. ll part of getting that better life.

 

 

Trust but verify.

[Andaman Al]

5 minutes ago, Anthony5 said:

 

Illegals don't vote because they want to vote, they vote because they get paid for it. ll part of getting that better life.

 

Interesting. SO how much were they paid then? How much to risk all?

[Anthony5]

Just now, Andaman Al said:

Interesting. SO how much were they paid then? How much to risk all?

 

You should ask Hilary about that, but i doubt she will tell you the truth, since she is known to rarely tell the truth.

[Andaman Al]

Just now, Anthony5 said:

 

You should ask Hilary about that, but i doubt she will tell you the truth, since she is known to rarely tell the truth.

There is a strong wiff of male bovine feaces in the air along with more than a hint of desperation. Give it up ..........please. YOU said illegals are now being paid to vote. I am calling BS. Lets have some evidence, rather than some random thought plucked from the enormity of Anthony5's mind.

[Anthony5]

2 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

There is a strong wiff of male bovine feaces in the air along with more than a hint of desperation. Give it up ..........please. YOU said illegals are now being paid to vote. I am calling BS. Lets have some evidence, rather than some random thought plucked from the enormity of Anthony5's mind.

 

How about the elections were hacked by the Russians?

 

There you go, I'm sure that is more acceptable for you.

[Andaman Al]

Just now, Anthony5 said:

 

How about the elections were hacked by the Russians?

 

There you go, I'm sure that is more acceptable for you.

I never claimed that. Trump said they were rigged, now it seems he does not want to prove it. What is not acceptable is you making wild claims that illegals are paid to go out and vote, it is simply ridiculous and immature.

[Ulysses G.]

8 minutes ago, Anthony5 said:

 

How about the elections were hacked by the Russians?

 

There you go, I'm sure that is more acceptable for you.

 

Of course, a more acceptable conspiracy theory.

[Andaman Al]

25 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Of course, a more acceptable conspiracy theory.

YOU are the guys making conspiracy claims about paid voting illegal aliens. If you are going to claim something then back it up or shut up. I have not claimed anything. It's like being in a kindergarten. 

[Ulysses G.]

1 minute ago, Andaman Al said:

YOU are the guys making conspiracy claims about paid voting illegal aliens.

 

Baloney. I have made no such claims.

[Andaman Al]

3 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Baloney. I have made no such claims.

YOU jumped in on SOMBODY ELSES argument! Take responsibility or keep out where you were not involved.

[Ulysses G.]

In case you have not noticed, this is a DEBATE forum.

[Andaman Al]

1 minute ago, Ulysses G. said:

In case you have not noticed, this is a DEBATE forum.

Then if you are going to jump in on somebody else debate, be aware of what they have said and what you are endorsing. It is also supposed to be a forum for adults, which one assumes have got more than two cells between their ears.

[lannarebirth]

2 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Not sure how the two sentences connect. Would voting for fringe independent candidate change things? Would belief in the merits of the candidate voted for change his qualities or those standing for election next time?

 

Yes, that is my assertion. Always vote for the best person regardless of their likelihood of winning. That's how you change things over the course of several election cycles. And let's face it, it took several election cycles in order for two such horrible candidates could be put forth. The same works in the other direction. To answer your second question, yes, voting for someone whose qualities you believe in will attract more candidates with similar qualities. Just like voting for horribly flawed candidates, one of whom will be labeled "the winner" will attract more horribly flawed candidates.

[Thakkar]

To jump in on the hacking thing, not much is known, except that there was such an effort by an outside power:

 

The leader of the National Security Agency says there shouldn't be "any doubt in anybody's mind" that there was "a conscious effort by a nation-state" to sway the result of the 2016 presidential election.

http://www.businessinsider.com/nsa-chief-nation-state-swayed-president-election-2016-11

 

Now, he didn't say whether the effort was successful, or which candidate the effort was meant to help.

 

Perhaps the nation-state wanted to sway the election in favor of HRC and it failed because Trump won so bigly.

 

Whatever the case, it certainly warrants investigation. How can one disagree that this needs to be looked into with an open mind?

[Thakkar]

Regarding the recount, when you are bragging that you have the biggest, longest, thickest mandate in the history of the republic, why should you be troubled if someone wants to verify its magnificently tremendous size with a tape measure?

 

 

[iReason]

Just now, Time Traveller said:

Human behavior is my proof.

 

Fabricated BS from your delusional mind.

[Thakkar]

Reporter: Mr. Trump, how do you feel about the mandate you'll have at your inauguration?

The Donald: Mandate? Mandate? No, I'll be taking Melania!

[lannarebirth]

8 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

To jump in on the hacking thing, not much is known, except that there was such an effort by an outside power:

 

The leader of the National Security Agency says there shouldn't be "any doubt in anybody's mind" that there was "a conscious effort by a nation-state" to sway the result of the 2016 presidential election.

http://www.businessinsider.com/nsa-chief-nation-state-swayed-president-election-2016-11

 

Now, he didn't say whether the effort was successful, or which candidate the effort was meant to help.

 

Perhaps the nation-state wanted to sway the election in favor of HRC and it failed because Trump won so bigly.

 

Whatever the case, it certainly warrants investigation. How can one disagree that this needs to be looked into with an open mind?

 

I imagine it has been looked into and the only reason that the specifics are not widely known is that doing so might give too great of an insight to foreign actors of how great our intelligence capabilities are. I believe Obama either strongly implied or directly stated it was the Russians and that America was preparing a "proportionate response".

[Morch]

29 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Yes, that is my assertion. Always vote for the best person regardless of their likelihood of winning. That's how you change things over the course of several election cycles. And let's face it, it took several election cycles in order for two such horrible candidates could be put forth. The same works in the other direction. To answer your second question, yes, voting for someone whose qualities you believe in will attract more candidates with similar qualities. Just like voting for horribly flawed candidates, one of whom will be labeled "the winner" will attract more horribly flawed candidates.

 

As assertions, these are fine. Each to his  own.

As facts, well...I don't see that voting for independent fringe candidates changed things much over the years, and would take more than asserting it did to support this line of thinking. Doesn't seem like years of voting for such candidates made much of dent with regard to the qualities of mainstream candidates, as the latest elections show.