Will someone please explain to me why Trump is being criticized for not at this time waiving his constitutional right to contest the coming election...
All frivolous challenges excepted which the courts will quickly toss.... If by chance substantial evidence was uncovered that the election was rigged would any clear thinking American not want to leave room for a further investigation before a person was sworn in to lead our country...
We used to be the greatest country but we are now one the most easily led and gullible nations...
I think Trump was talking about the MAAC BB results. And he did say if his team wins, he'll accept the outcome. OT, what did you think he meant? I have a feeling he's a Siena fan, as I've heard them say the same thing many times. In fact every time Iona wins the MAAC this Siena guy says that the game was rigged.
Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart —you know, if you're a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it's true!—but when you're a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that's why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we're a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it's not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it's four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven't figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it's gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.
Will someone please explain to me why Trump is being criticized for not at this time waiving his constitutional right to contest the coming election...
All frivolous challenges excepted which the courts will quickly toss.... If by chance substantial evidence was uncovered that the election was rigged would any clear thinking American not want to leave room for a further investigation before a person was sworn in to lead our country...
We used to be the greatest country but we are now one the most easily led and gullible nations...
Why do you tend to twist things OT? The Donald is being criticized because he keeps stating that our elections are rigged. There is no proof of that whatsoever. You managed to shift emphasis to a smaller point and then use one of your derogatory posts like "easily led and gullible nations..." For Shame OT, For Shame!
Chels, hillary registered over a million dead people and will be busing people in states that are close from district to district to vote for the dead, caught on tape, you call that not rigged
Chels, hillary registered over a million dead people and will be busing people in states that are close from district to district to vote for the dead, caught on tape, you call that not rigged
Will someone please explain to me why Trump is being criticized for not at this time waiving his constitutional right to contest the coming election...
All frivolous challenges excepted which the courts will quickly toss.... If by chance substantial evidence was uncovered that the election was rigged would any clear thinking American not want to leave room for a further investigation before a person was sworn in to lead our country...
We used to be the greatest country but we are now one the most easily led and gullible nations...
Problem is OT, if Trump had said at the debate what you just said there would be no controversy. He didn't, however, say that if there was evidence of widespread voter fraud he would contest the election. When asked about it he said "I'll have to wait to see and keep you in suspense." So instead of saying the perfectly reasonable "Of course I will accept the will of the people on election day, unless of course there is evidence of wide spread voter fraud, in which case I reserve my right to contest the results" (which btw would be incredibly unusual thing for a Presidential candidate to say, but so be it), he said "I'll have to wait and see and keep you in suspense I guess" which suggests a couple of things. He's not sure he will accept the results with no qualifying reason as to why, and he doesn't seem to be able to separate the reality of running for President of the United States from being some sort of entertainer, who wants to "keep us in suspense." In your vast catalogue of experience, when have you heard a candidate from one of the major political parties cast doubt on the results of an election, before it has even taken place? Its unpatriotic and undermines the very Democracy you fought to protect.
Will someone please explain to me why Trump is being criticized for not at this time waiving his constitutional right to contest the coming election...
All frivolous challenges excepted which the courts will quickly toss.... If by chance substantial evidence was uncovered that the election was rigged would any clear thinking American not want to leave room for a further investigation before a person was sworn in to lead our country...
We used to be the greatest country but we are now one the most easily led and gullible nations...
Problem is OT, if Trump had said at the debate what you just said there would be no controversy. He didn't, however, say that if there was evidence of widespread voter fraud he would contest the election. When asked about it he said "I'll have to wait to see and keep you in suspense." So instead of saying the perfectly reasonable "Of course I will accept the will of the people on election day, unless of course there is evidence of wide spread voter fraud, in which case I reserve my right to contest the results" (which btw would be incredibly unusual thing for a Presidential candidate to say, but so be it), he said "I'll have to wait and see and keep you in suspense I guess" which suggests a couple of things. He's not sure he will accept the results with no qualifying reason as to why, and he doesn't seem to be able to separate the reality of running for President of the United States from being some sort of entertainer, who wants to "keep us in suspense." In your vast catalogue of experience, when have you heard a candidate from one of the major political parties cast doubt on the results of an election, before it has even taken place? Its unpatriotic and undermines the very Democracy you fought to protect.
Ctbill, the question was asked to Trump after the statement, after you saw the video today of possible voter fraud will you accept the result of the election .
Problem is OT, if Trump had said at the debate what you just said there would be no controversy. He didn't, however, say that if there was evidence of widespread voter fraud he would contest the election. When asked about it he said "I'll have to wait to see and keep you in suspense." So instead of saying the perfectly reasonable "Of course I will accept the will of the people on election day, unless of course there is evidence of wide spread voter fraud, in which case I reserve my right to contest the results" (which btw would be incredibly unusual thing for a Presidential candidate to say, but so be it), he said "I'll have to wait and see and keep you in suspense I guess" which suggests a couple of things. He's not sure he will accept the results with no qualifying reason as to why, and he doesn't seem to be able to separate the reality of running for President of the United States from being some sort of entertainer, who wants to "keep us in suspense." In your vast catalogue of experience, when have you heard a candidate from one of the major political parties cast doubt on the results of an election, before it has even taken place? Its unpatriotic and undermines the very Democracy you fought to protect.
Ctbill, the question was asked to Trump after the statement, after you saw the video today of possible voter fraud will you accept the result of the election .
So I guess what you are saying is that he's really less than artful when answering questions. OT's answer would have been perfect.
Chels, hillary registered over a million dead people and will be busing people in states that are close from district to district to vote for the dead, caught on tape, you call that not rigged
Hillary didn't register dead people. How could she? The Pew report that Trump sites says there are dead people on registration rolls all over the country. It doesn't say whether any dead person has actually been allowed to vote. It indicates that some registration rolls are not up to date, which I think makes sense since people die and registrars probably miss that. And then there is the assumption of course that only democrats and not republicans would cheat and use these dead voter's ID's to vote. No evidence whatsoever of that. The Pew report also suggests that there are illegal aliens registered to vote. Again no conclusion as to whether they actually have, or actually influenced any election. This voter fraud stuff is nonsense. Are there cases of voter fraud? Sure. Trump sites one situation in Colorado where there are several dead Republicans registered to vote. None of these incidents would sway the outcome of an election. If Democratic voter fraud is so rampant, why do we have a Republican controlled Congress? Most of the SOS's running this election, including in Florida and Ohio, are Republicans.
Why do you tend to twist things OT? The Donald is being criticized because he keeps stating that our elections are rigged.
There is no proof of that whatsoever. You managed to shift emphasis to a smaller point and then use one of your derogatory posts like "easily led and gullible nations..." For Shame OT, For Shame! [/quote]CHELS
Chels........You see, read, and accept only what agrees or distorts to fit your '' Brain Washed mind''
In the last Presidential election in several Phila. District's Obama received over a 1,000 votes while the Republican candidate did not receive a single vote...If you believe that is possible then you are even further indoctrinated then I thought...Are you so naive to actually not believe that for many persons who have been dead for years will not have a vote cast in their name, then I have a bridge for sale....
Why do you tend to twist things OT? The Donald is being criticized because he keeps stating that our elections are rigged.
There is no proof of that whatsoever. You managed to shift emphasis to a smaller point and then use one of your derogatory posts like "easily led and gullible nations..." For Shame OT, For Shame!
CHELS
Chels........You see, read, and accept only what agrees or distorts to fit your '' Brain Washed mind''
In the last Presidential election in several Phila. District's Obama received over a 1,000 votes while the Republican candidate did not receive a single vote...If you believe that is possible then you are even further indoctrinated then I thought...Are you so naive to actually not believe that for many persons who have been dead for years will not have a vote cast in their name, then I have a bridge for sale....
[/quote]
OT you fall for the extreme right wing propaganda every time and tell us we're gullible and brainwashed due to "liberal" indoctrination (which I guess I received at Iona College).
Some Philadelphia Districts Don’t Like Romney All told, this email purporting to show “astounding” evidence of “voter fraud” contains just a scant sliver of truth. The only correct claim is that some districts in Philadelphia recorded 100 percent of their votes for Obama — a stat that isn’t “a mathematical and statistical impossibility,” as the email claims, and isn’t all that surprising once the full context is known. Claim: In 59 voting districts in the Philadelphia region, Obama received 100% of the votes with not even a single vote recorded for Romney. (A mathematical and statistical impossibility).
It’s not mathematically impossible. The 59 districts are in areas of the city that are mainly African American, as the Philadelphia Inquirer reported. And Obama received 93 percent of the black vote nationwide. In 2008, Obama received 100 percent of the vote in 57 districts in Philadelphia. So it was not that unusual that something similar happened this time around. In fact, Inquirer reporters had a tough time tracking down any registered Republicans in these areas. To be clear, these districts make up a small subset of all of Philadelphia. The 59 that went 100 percent for Obama in 2012 constitute 19,605 votes, just 3 percent of the total votes cast in the city. — Lori Robertson, with Jesse DuBois
Last Edit: Oct 21, 2016 11:53:28 GMT -5 by hawaii bill
