Truth and trust abandoned...

[Pete F.]

NO. The Democrats did not decline to accept defeat in 2016. Hillary Clinton conceded, albeit with insinuations that the Russians had helped Trump. But grumbling about your loss is a far cry from contesting it. A few Democrats lodged complaints about the vote in January 2017 when the Electoral College results were read out. Joe Biden, the then-president of the Senate and sitting vice-president handled those matters as he should according to the Constitution.

And playing your silly game about how "there are allegations of" is baloney, it matters now. Never more than now. It isn’t about the precedent that this might set for some imagined Democratic abuse of the future. The abuse is here. The abuse of power is now. This is a constitutional crisis because one party has decided that it cares more for power than for the American system. Giving one iota of support for Trump’s unconstitutional coup attempt is discrediting for every person, politician and commentator who fails to call it out loudly and unequivocally. A decent few, like Senators Ben Sasse and Mitt Romney have done so. Find your voice, or don’t insult the rest of us by calling yourself a patriot.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

NO. The Democrats did not decline to accept defeat in 2016. .

Bonkers and dishonest. God forbid you be critical of your side.

The only thing that democrats didn't say about 2016, was that they lost fair and square. They made every other conceivable claim. Including putting pressure on electors to vote for someone other than Trump after the election. Sorry Pete, that happened. Just because you can't being yourself to admit how terrifying that is, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

The only thing that democrats didn't say about 2016, was that they lost fair and square. They made every other conceivable claim. Including putting pressure on electors to vote for someone other than Trump after the election. Sorry Pete, that happened. Just because you can't being yourself to admit how terrifying that is, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

I had never even heard of Dems putting pressure on electors until you brought it up. Looks like is was mostly a few disgruntled Sanders supporters.

Jim, there’s no parallel for this. A sitting president just brazenly committed what is most likely election fraud and his base couldn’t care otherwise.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I had never even heard of Dems putting pressure on electors until you brought it up. Looks like is was mostly a few disgruntled Sanders supporters.

Jim, there’s no parallel for this. A sitting president just brazenly committed what is most likely election fraud and his base couldn’t care otherwise.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

dems putting pressure on electors was everywhere after the 2016 election. you were probably still too morbidly depressed, but i’m no making it up. it didn’t get the traction that decertification has now within the GOP. but neither did it get any public resistance from anyone i. the left. None.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

dems putting pressure on electors was everywhere after the 2016 election. you were probably still too morbidly depressed, but i’m no making it up. it didn’t get the traction that decertification has now within the GOP. but neither did it get any public resistance from anyone i. the left. None.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Spence is playing drama queen again
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

Spence is playing drama queen again
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it makes democrats look bad? in that case, it didn’t happen.

scott, you and i have had respectful but spirited disagreements here, as i’ve had with Detbuch and dangles. these guys are engaging in one, big circle jerk of TDS.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

dbut neither did it get any public resistance from anyone i. the left. None.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

THAT'S BECAUSE NOBODY KNEW ANYTHING ABOUT IT

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

THAT'S BECAUSE NOBODY KNEW ANYTHING ABOUT IT

or everyone knew, but many people aren’t capable of criticizing their own side. do you think you fall into that category?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

or everyone knew, but many people aren’t capable of criticizing their own side. do you think you fall into that category?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I am pretty clued in on news stuff and don’t remember this happening in the past on either side, but it clearly wasn’t at this scale. Maybe I missed it.

I am only hearing about the Barbra boxer stuff now (on a story on msnbc this morning fwiw)....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by spence

I had never even heard of Dems putting pressure on electors until you brought it up. Looks like is was mostly a few disgruntled Sanders supporters.

Jim, there’s no parallel for this. A sitting president just brazenly committed what is most likely election fraud and his base couldn’t care otherwise.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If his base couldn’t care otherwise then why did a person who most likely identifies as R start this thread.
Stop being dramatic Jeff, your turtleneck is cutting off your circulation or Paul stole your password.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

If his base couldn’t care otherwise then why did a person who most likely identifies as R start this thread.
Stop being dramatic Jeff, your turtleneck is cutting off your circulation or Paul stole your password.

Just got another PM on another site from a member here stating what a scummy person you are and some instances from your past.

It is amazing that that has happened multiple times.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

If his base couldn’t care otherwise then why did a person who most likely identifies as R start this thread.
Stop being dramatic Jeff, your turtleneck is cutting off your circulation or Paul stole your password.

Please reread your post, think, then edit if you feel appropriate.

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by spence

Please reread your post, think, then edit if you feel appropriate.

I love it when you play dumb
That is adorable

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Hypocrite much

By David Hogarty • Published November 6, 2008 • Updated on November 6, 2008 at 2:11 pm

President-elect Barack Obama won't be inaugurated for another ten weeks, but groups are already forming on the Internet to call for his impeachment.

Several groups exist on the social networking site Facebook, calling for the removal of Obama from office for a number of reasons, including planning to not uphold the Constitution of the United States and campaign finance violations.

Impeach Barack Obama was formed under the assumption that the winner of Tuesday's election will waste little time in violating his oath of office and already has more than 2,500 members on Facebook:

"This group has been created under the assumption that it takes approximately 7 seconds for a modern day President to violate this oath. So we should be ready."

Impeach Barack Hussein Obama seems mostly concerned with the Democrat's prior support for an assault weapons ban and accusations that he's a closet Marxist.

"Obama has voiced support for various unconstitutional programs such as the assault weapons ban, universal healthcare, and various schemes for wealth distribution. What are we going to do about it? RESIST SOCIALISM! IMPEACH HIM!

might as well start before he gets in office."

Originally Posted by Pete F.

From the last election, I wonder who the Republicans were listening to?
Insert stupid period thing here......

A historic number of “faithless” electors -- seven in total--each cast their ballots on Monday for a candidate other than the one who won his or her state. What may be more surprising, given the level of protests against Donald Trump and the pressure exerted on Republican electors, is that a greater number were untrue to Hillary Clinton than to Mr. Trump.


Among the 538 electors chosen to represent their states in the Electoral College, five were faithless to the Democratic nominee and two to the Republican. Prior to this year, there hasn’t been more than one faithless elector in any presidential election since 1948.

Originally Posted by Pete F.

NO. The Democrats did not decline to accept defeat in 2016. Hillary Clinton conceded, albeit with insinuations that the Russians had helped Trump. But grumbling about your loss is a far cry from contesting it. A few Democrats lodged complaints about the vote in January 2017 when the Electoral College results were read out. Joe Biden, the then-president of the Senate and sitting vice-president handled those matters as he should according to the Constitution.

And playing your silly game about how "there are allegations of" is baloney, it matters now. Never more than now. It isn’t about the precedent that this might set for some imagined Democratic abuse of the future. The abuse is here. The abuse of power is now. This is a constitutional crisis because one party has decided that it cares more for power than for the American system. Giving one iota of support for Trump’s unconstitutional coup attempt is discrediting for every person, politician and commentator who fails to call it out loudly and unequivocally. A decent few, like Senators Ben Sasse and Mitt Romney have done so. Find your voice, or don’t insult the rest of us by calling yourself a patriot.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Bonkers and dishonest. God forbid you be critical of your side.

The only thing that democrats didn't say about 2016, was that they lost fair and square. They made every other conceivable claim. Including putting pressure on electors to vote for someone other than Trump after the election. Sorry Pete, that happened. Just because you can't being yourself to admit how terrifying that is, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

You consistently ignore history to repeat Trumplican tropes.