Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[PerfectWagnerite]

He was careless, believed the Fox News bubble.  Again, it was entirely his race to lose, and in the middle of the debate cycle, he was in not merely a strong position, but IIRC had the advantage.  He didn't lose because he was nice (though I think that a reasonable adjective to apply to the former Governor of the Commonwealth);  it was a combination of his believing the favorably-hued reports, and being out-generalled.

he lost because he said "He's not worried about the 40%, they will take care of themselves". Well those 40% said: if you don't care why the heck should we vote for you? You MASS HOLE !

[Karl Henning]

he lost because he said "He's not worried about the 40%, they will take care of themselves". Well those 40% said: if you don't care why the heck should we vote for you? You MASS HOLE !

I see your point, but in every cycle there are incidents like this which wind up recoverable for a flexible (in the best sense) candidate.

[Karl Henning]

No, no real difference between El Tupé and Gore.

"[ I ] pledge to all of my voters and supporters, and to all of the people of the United States, that I will totally accept the results of this great and historic presidential election if I win."

[...]

Trump is trolling the press. But at least some supporters are taking him seriously.

[San Antone]

Media Seems to Have Forgotten Gore's 2000 Challenge John Hinderaker, PowerLine

[San Antone]

Laws are for the Little People
by Mark Steyn

Not for her ...

[San Antone]

8 Times Liberals Claimed An Election Was Stolen Or Rigged

[San Antone]

The Clinton-Obama E-mail Scandal

John Podesta's e-mails, which we now have courtesy of WikiLeaks, confirm what we already knew: The Justice Department's decision not to indict Hillary Clinton was a politicized travesty.

[Brian]

Media Seems to Have Forgotten Gore's 2000 Challenge John Hinderaker, PowerLine

8 Times Liberals Claimed An Election Was Stolen Or Rigged

Beat ya to it:

Lest sanantonio claim again that Trump is pulling an Al Gore, here's Al Gore's concession speech:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2000/12/14/us/43rd-president-his-remarks-gore-says-he-will-help-bush-bring-american-together.html

"Let there be no doubt, while I strongly disagree with the court's decision, I accept it. I accept the finality of this outcome, which will be ratified next Monday in the Electoral College. And tonight, for the sake of our unity as a people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession."

[Karl Henning]

One of the pieces that David linked to includes some shady right-wing boilerplate viz. "voter fraud."

Trump's rigged election talk is reaping what Republican leaders have sowed

In Texas, for example, a gun permit counts as a valid form of identification, but a student ID does not. The reason, obviously, is that gun owners are usually Republicans while college students are usually Democrats. Best practices for writing voter ID laws that will help Republicans win election are provided by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and other business groups who like it when Republicans win because Republicans tend to favor lower taxes and more business-friendly regulatory regimes.

The problem with this is that you can't say the purpose of your voter ID regime is to tilt the partisan balance of power in elections. And you really can't say that the purpose is specifically to reduce the number of black and Latino people who vote, because that will get your law struck down as unconstitutional.

[San Antone]

Beat ya to it:

Well, to be fair, Gore's concession only came after he lost at the Supreme Court - and you  know what, the American democracy survived.   

You should at least wait until Trump exhausts all his legal options before crying foul.

[kishnevi]

8 Times Liberals Claimed An Election Was Stolen Or Rigged

Note that almost all of these claims were made after the election, and never by the candidate. In fact, it even cites one candidate (Kerry) who noted that he should not be the person making the claim.

[San Antone]

Note that almost all of these claims were made after the election, and never by the candidate. In fact, it even cites one candidate (Kerry) who noted that he should not be the person making the claim.

The point is that it does not challenge the American democracy, the exaggerated claim by the press, for anyone - candidate or otherwise - to call allege election fraud or voting irregularities.  Nor does it matter if it occurs before or after the voting has taken place.  It would be a problem if Trump were to still not accept the results after a legal challenge proved Clinton won fair and square.

[PerfectWagnerite]

It would be a problem if Trump were to still not accept the results after a legal challenge proved Clinton won fair and square.

I don't know why it is important nor relevant that he accepts it or not. If he goes through all the legal challenges and Grandma won fair and square it doesn't matter what he thinks, this country is going to move on. No one is seriously entertaining the notion that he is going to incite some kind of rebellion right?

[Brian]

Well, to be fair, Gore's concession only came after he lost at the Supreme Court - and you  know what, the American democracy survived.   

You should at least wait until Trump exhausts all his legal options before crying foul.

But Gore was making a legal challenge to a known event, the recount, and he was not "crying foul" over fraud, only demanding a recount. Trump has no legal standing, has no specific grievance, and has not even had an election.

It would be a problem if Trump were to still not accept the results after a legal challenge proved Clinton won fair and square.

And also:
"It would be a problem if Trump were to still not accept the results after Clinton won fair and square and no legal challenge was necessary."

[San Antone]

But Gore was making a legal challenge to a known event, the recount, and he was not "crying foul" over fraud, only demanding a recount. Trump has no legal standing, has no specific grievance, and has not even had an election.

And all he has done was say that he has suspicions about the possibility.  But what I think he really means is something like this:  the press is working to sink his campaign, the FBI gave her a pass, and insiders in his own party are undermining his candidacy. IOW, elites are rigging the outcome through dirty tricks.

And also:
"It would be a problem if Trump were to still not accept the results after Clinton won fair and square and no legal challenge was necessary."

Yes, of course - and I doubt it will be close anyway.

[Madiel]

Suspicious about the possibility. Ha.

He's deliberately throwing ideas out there with no evidence at all. As is typical.

Maybe he's an alien lizard. I don't know. Some people are saying that on the Internet, but I don't know. Maybe we'll find out one day. Lizards shouldn't be allowed to run. Sad.

[Madiel]

And maybe people are undermining his candidacy because his candidacy is shit. There's that false idea of balance again, that you have to treat 2 sides of something as equal even if you can plainly see they're not equal.

Can you imagine if sports reporters couldn't say a team was losing because they'd be accused of undermining the team?

[Karl Henning]

Oh, those Leftists misconstruing El Tupé's innocent, jokey remarks!

'One member of Republican nominee Donald Trump’s inner circle, Roger Stone, has “predicted” (which is to say, encouraged) “widespread civil disobedience” if Trump loses the election — a situation that he once described, somewhat nonsensically, as a “bloodbath” without violence. Another ally, Sheriff David Clarke of Milwaukee County — a sworn law enforcement officer himself — has adopted the slogan, “It’s pitchforks and torches time.”'

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[Madiel]

Make America like 1860 again.

[Brian]

And all he has done was say that he has suspicions about the possibility.  But what I think he really means is something like this:  the press is working to sink his campaign, the FBI gave her a pass, and insiders in his own party are undermining his candidacy. IOW, elites are rigging the outcome through dirty tricks.

Point taken, if your point is that the election is not rigged but he just feels like everyone in the intelligentsia & power circles hates him.