United States of Corporate America

Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
The Clinton campaign and the DNCs actions during the democratic primary are a major reason Clinton lost the general election to Trump

I'm not particularly interested in talking about the evidence of that because I don't believe you're interested in actually seeing it. I've provided it before, go look in the DNC email leaks thread if you want to see it. If it's all so banal, she wouldn't have lost the election. She abandoned the middle-class and got caught with her hand in the cookie jar, the combination of which, and probably a few other things, is why she lost to Trump.
Click to expand...
You are changing the subject, dude. Your assertion was Clinton won BECAUSE DNC collusion with the press. I'm disputing that. If you want to stop with that made up shit then I'll be glad to talk with you about why Clinton lost the election.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
You are changing the subject, dude. Your assertion was Clinton won BECAUSE DNC collusion with the press. I'm disputing that. If you want to stop with that made up shit then I'll be glad to talk with you about why Clinton lost the election.
Click to expand...
You haven't disputed anything, all you've ever done is say "nuh-uh!" in response to the DNC and media collusion claim without offering any evidence to support it. "What they did couldn't have won them that amount of votes!" Start there, provide the evidence to support that claim
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
You haven't disputed anything, all you've ever done is say "nuh-uh!" in response to the DNC and media collusion claim without offering any evidence to support it. "What they did couldn't have won them that amount of votes!" Start there, provide the evidence to support that claim
Click to expand...
You want me to prove a negative. Sorry man, that's not how a debate is done. If you want to bore everybody with a claim that Clinton stole the election from Bernie then you'll need to do more than say DNC-media collusion. What I'm saying is that 12% margin of victory is too large for the kind of shenanigans that actually occurred. Historically that kind of election fraud has been accomplished by ballot box stuffing and voter intimidation, not by a few people talking to each other about what they might do and "stealing" a question the was obviously going to be asked at a debate.

http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/most-rigged-and-corrupt-elections-in-modern-world-history.html

Of course I can't prove anything that didn't happen. That's pretty funny of you to say.

Look at how close the election was given how much shit was slung yet the poll numbers hardly wavered over the course of the election. How can anybody possibly say that the banal communications between DNC and a few people in the media caused millions to change their votes.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
You're the one who made the claim the DNC, Clinton campaign and media collusion couldn't have given Clinton the amount of votes she needed to win

So, where is your evidence for this claim?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
You're the one who made the claim the DNC, Clinton campaign and media collusion couldn't have given Clinton the amount of votes she needed to win

So, where is your evidence for this claim?
Click to expand...
you're the one claiming rob rot and arcticspaghettinoodle aren't pedophiles.

where is your evidence for this claim?
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
You're the one who made the claim the DNC, Clinton campaign and media collusion couldn't have given Clinton the amount of votes she needed to win

So, where is your evidence for this claim?
Click to expand...
I'll remind you of how we started discussing this claim of rigged primary. It was my reply to this post of YOURS
Padawanbater2 said:
The fact that they showed direct media, DNC and Clinton campaign collusion to rig the democratic primary
Click to expand...
I showed you that there IS history of that kind of vote fraud where millions of votes are changed but in those cases, the fraud was massive ballot stuffing or voter intimidation or just plain fraud. I point out that there were tons of false media stories and outright lies and still the general election was pretty close and not out of line with polling data early in the election cycle. I say this to show that I'm not just making up my denial of your assertion. You must know that proving a negative is almost impossible. I ask you to prove a positive, which should be possible if you are correct. I will point out that you are claiming about four million people switched their vote because the DNC and Clinton campaign colluded. I'm asking YOU to prove that claim. Given the size of the fraud that you claim happened, it shouldn't be that hard.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
I'll remind you of how we started discussing this claim of rigged primary. It was my reply to this post of YOURS


I showed you that there IS history of that kind of vote fraud where millions of votes are changed but in those cases, the fraud was massive ballot stuffing or voter intimidation or just plain fraud. I point out that there were tons of false media stories and outright lies and still the general election was pretty close and not out of line with polling data early in the election cycle. I say this to show that I'm not just making up my denial of your assertion. You must know that proving a negative is almost impossible. I ask you to prove a positive, which should be possible if you are correct. I will point out that you are claiming about four million people switched their vote because the DNC and Clinton campaign colluded. I'm asking YOU to prove that claim. Given the size of the fraud that you claim happened, it shouldn't be that hard.
Click to expand...
The number of votes garnered through unethical means is impossible to verify one way or the other

Therefore, all we have is the fact that the DNC colluded with members of the mainstream media specifically to help Clinton win the democratic primary. That is direct evidence of the primary being rigged.

We can argue about the degree until the cows come home, the fact is, it was rigged and democracy was subverted.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
How can one claim Russia "hacked" the election (by releasing the DNC leaks) and the democratic primary was legitimate? If the democratic primary was legitimate, what would there have been to release that could have affected the outcome of the election? If you believe Russia "hacked" the election, then you also must believe the Clinton campaign meddled in the primary and colluded with the media.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
How can one claim Russia "hacked" the election (by releasing the DNC leaks) and the democratic primary was legitimate? If the democratic primary was legitimate, what would there have been to release that could have affected the outcome of the election? If you believe Russia "hacked" the election, then you also must believe the Clinton campaign meddled in the primary and colluded with the media.
Click to expand...
 
tangerinegreen555

tangerinegreen555

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
How can one claim Russia "hacked" the election (by releasing the DNC leaks) and the democratic primary was legitimate? If the democratic primary was legitimate, what would there have been to release that could have affected the outcome of the election? If you believe Russia "hacked" the election, then you also must believe the Clinton campaign meddled in the primary and colluded with the media.
Click to expand...
Do you believe that stuff was all true and accurate? From Russia?

Our intelligence agencies are mistaken?

I'll always side with our own people before foreign governments with ulterior motives. Their interference may be for completely different reasons than we assume at this point.

They have a long history over there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top