Democrats who won't accept Presidential election results

Jump to Last Post 1-9 of 9 discussions (49 posts)

95
Readmikenowposted 4 years ago

If you want to know what Democrats are guilty of...simply see what they are accusing others of doing. THAT is what they're guilty of doing.

"Will Democrats accept election loss? New report says no.

But there is another, equally pressing question: Will Democrats accept the results of the election if Joe Biden loses? A new report suggests the answer could be no.

The report comes from a secretive group called the Transition Integrity Project. A bipartisan, anti-Trump organization, TIP was created last year by Georgetown law professor Rosa Brooks and historian and think tanker Nils Gilman, "out of concern that the Trump administration may seek to manipulate, ignore, undermine or disrupt the 2020 presidential election and transition process."

So those are the four scenarios. In only one did a candidate win a clear victory and the opposing candidate refuse to accept the result. And the loser who refused to accept the result was Biden — not Trump."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin … Vijoks83Ds
reply report
1. 71
  Ken Burgessposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  They didn't accept the last elections results, they certainly won't accept this one.
  
  I think when one considers this, many of the efforts in Democrat controlled States (CA, NY, WA) begin to make more sense, they are allowing things, and putting into action, activities and events that have no regards for future elections, they have no regards for the Federal authority or any authority not aligned with their own.
  
  In a recent election in NY a June primary vote in which an estimated 20% of New York City mail-in ballots were thrown out due to technicalities.
  
  20%
  
  You can bet there will be no acceptance by the Democrats of any election result they do not win.
  reply report
  92
  Abby Slutskyposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  How sad we have had a four year temper tantrum by the media. I thought the Democratic slogan was "Hate has no home here." Does that exclude them? I am saddened by what is going on.
  reply report
2. 85
  Sharlee01posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  No the Dem's will not accept the election results if Trump wins. They did not last time and this time will be no different.
  reply report
  79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  I don't know where you come up with this Sharlee? Did not the Democrats accept Trump as President? It is true that we did not care for his governance, but no one interfered with his term of office nor prevented him from takin the oath January 20, 2017.
  
  Was there not a valid concern about Clinton winning by 3 million votes in the popular vote tally, the same way GW Bush won in 2000 with a minority of the popular vote? That was the way the cookies crumbled, we lived with it but that does mean we have to like it and sit in some corner somewhere in silence.
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Does Russia Russia Russia sound familiar? Does impeachment ring a bell? The Dem's never to this day have accepted president Trump. Most do not even address him as President Trump, but Mr. Trump. The news has been pouring out for a week about the Comey Russian witchhunt. Factual evidence including Sally Yates's testimony from last week. And I agree they did not agree with his way of governing, in my view because he made tall look so easy, Made fools of them, showed them for what they were... Do nothing shell games barkers. Hey, we have a system of electing a president. And you would have been fine if the EC put the size 9 shoe on Hillary's foot, would you not? You have one vote as I do, not sure it wise to ever use the word "we". Many say one thing and when chips are down, voted for the better candidate.
  
  If Biden wins, will we also have to swallow him taking the oath from his basement? If you can vote for a man that forgot to campaign, not sure where you are coming from.
  reply report
  79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  The Republicans impeached Bill Clinton, what is your explanation for that?They were trying to bring down a man who rather than preside over a disaster was presiding over the go-go economy of the 1990s.
  
  I can vote for a man that at least from my perspective will not be taking us backwards, that is easy for me to do.
  
  We all vote for whom we think is the "better candidate". It is just that my opinion of who that is is substantially different from yours.
  
  In modern times, the Electoral College has benefitted GOP Presidential contenders and as demographics change, they will be relying on this "failsafe" so much more to "eke" out victories.
  
  He is there isn't he? If we did not accept him he would not be there. I still have issues with the man's ethics and integrity in the performance of his job, but again that is just me.
  reply report
79
Credence2posted 4 years ago
Look fellows, we accepted the 2016 results even though we don't have to like it. The question is will Republicans and Trump accept the verdict of the voters if they don't win in 2020 that's the real question right now

and for the sake of future Harmony there had better not be any problems on that score or there is going to be trouble in River City.
reply report
60
Live to Learnposted 4 years ago
This shows the disconnect of the democratic mind from reality. They spent three years complaining that Trump didn't really win the election. They'll do it again in 2020.

If Biden were to win, I think the democrats have set the stage and the right will follow suit.
reply report
1. 79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  No, it shows your disconnect from reality. Trump is the sole candidate that did indicate that he would not step down if he lost. Did Biden ever make a similar threat, can you show documented evidence? Your right wing bias comes through loud and clear.
  
  https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/st … ion-result
  reply report
  60
  Live to Learnposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Credence, whatever the outcome, no matter how tainted the results may seem, I wouldn't support Trump not stepping down. I'm not biased. I'm a realist. Trump runs his mouth a lot. It doesn't mean anything. The left run their mouths and they have been whining for years, supporting Hillary in her whining, etc
  
  If it is a shady scenario we've got a pickle and I think the democrats would be tickled with the outcome. Especially the House. They've been attempting to usurp power and neuter another branch of the government for three years.
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Trump cannot not step down. If he remains in the White House he is trespassing (if nothing else) and will be removed by force. No one will follow his orders, his little papers ("executive" orders) mean nothing. His only hope would be a coup with the military and that isn't going to happen.
  reply report
95
Readmikenowposted 4 years ago
One of the biggest problems we have EVERY election is voter fraud. I could post many articles about Democrats stealing election and liberal judges permitting such a thing. It's the way it is when dealing with Democrats. I'll post just one about the realities of voter fraud and how the Democrats are planning to steal the election.

"Voter Fraud Is Real—Here's How Democrats Want to Steal the 2020 Election

Anyone who denies the existence of voter fraud in the U.S. needs to go to Heritage's online database, where they will find 1,285 proven instances of it—including 1,110 criminal convictions. Some of the stories are quite striking. In 2016, for example, Elbert Melton, the former mayor of Gordon, Alabama, illegally notarized two ballots, without witnesses present, while running for re-election. Melton won the race by only 16 votes—many local and state races are decided by such small margins. He was convicted of absentee ballot fraud, removed from office and sentenced to one year in prison.

The biggest way to expand voter fraud is to expand voting by mail. And Democrats want to impose universal vote-by-mail across the country."

https://www.newsweek.com/voter-fraud-re … on-1509180
reply report
1. 79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Why can't mail in ballots not be an attempt at voter fraud by the Republicans?
  
  We are in a pandemic, Mike, people should not have to decide to either not vote or not get sick.
  
  Why do Republicans always say that greater vote numbers benefit the Democrats? Are the GOP afraid of more eligible voters weighing in rather than less?
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  "Why do Republicans always say that greater vote numbers benefit the Democrats?"
  
  Perhaps because greater vote numbers pretty much mean illegal votes. Anyone, legal, that wants to vote can do so now; increasing the number simply means that those that are NOT legal have found a way to vote illegally.
  
  That is not to imply that certain "hot button" elections cannot produce more (legal) voters, but it does mean that lacking that "button" the extra voters are likely illegal. If they were not then we could have expected them to vote in the past and there would be no increase.
  reply report
  79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  But, Wilderness, perhaps it is not. There was a lot of turnout in 2008, that does not imply illegal voters but motivated people who were determined to cast a ballot and make a needed change. it is a matter of interest and stirring up the right crowd to recognize the urgent need to cast a ballot. 2020 will be an election cycle that would in itself elicit a high response and participation.
  
  Large turnout does not correlate to a flood of illegal voters, that are the fears of conservatives afraid that those legal registered voters that do not vote regularly will be sufficiently motivated to do otherwise this time.
  
  That is what lies behind their concept of voter suppression.
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  You make my point for me. 2008 DID have a "hot button"; the recession. 2020 will be the same with Trump.
  
  Yes, there was a large crowd voting, and that in itself points to the fact that we have no need to work hard to gain more voters. People will vote when they want to.
  reply report
  95
  Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  This is from the article. It clearly defines the problem with mail-in ballots.
  
  "The problem with mailing ballots like this is that lists of registered voters across the country are in terrible shape, and states do a poor job of cleaning their voter rolls. In fact, most states have given up on doing so. Every time they try, well-funded liberal groups accuse them of purging active, eligible voters from the rolls to suppress voting. As a result, ballots get mailed out to people who no longer live at the same addresses because they have moved or died.
  
  Therefore, a precious item, perhaps our society's most valuable—the ballot—is just out there, for anyone to exploit. It isn't that difficult to imagine how people could fill out fraudulent ballots, mail them in and have them counted."
  
  Republicans believe the right to vote is scared. Democrats believe there are tools they can use the get their desired outcome. Democrats don't care if their person is voted in legally, illegally as long as they hold office. I've seen it with my own eyes happen more than once.
  
  The problem is that Democrats don't value an honest election because in that case, they always lose.
  reply report
  79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Well, Mike the Dems did not lose in 2012, 2008, 1996, 1992, etc. were those elections rigged?
  
  If so, can I same the same regarding 2000, 2004 or 2016, for that matter.
  
  How is it that every time Dems win, the election is rigged but not the case with Republicans?
  reply report
  95
  Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  I'm talking about more than the presidential election. So, why is it Democrats have an issue with removing dead people from voting rolls? Trust me, dead people in Democrat areas vote Democrat. Even if they voted Republican when they were alive. Senate races have been determined by absentee ballots sent AFTER polling has been closed. Think about that for a minute, in a close election liberal judges well permit absentee ballots post-marked after the day of the election. I and many others believe there is something very wrong with it. THAT and others types of voting fraud skills are what Democrats bring to elections on ALL levels.
  
  Democrat voter fraud is the reason Al Frankin was able to become a senator.
  
  Read about it.
  
  https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/pe … oter-fraud
  
  There is so much voter fraud by so many Democrats in so many types of elections that if I tried to provide links to all of the articles, it would probably crash they HP system.
  
  Mail in voting is perfect for the dishonest voter-fraud driven Democrats. That is why it should never even be a consideration by anyone who wants fair elections.
  reply report
79
Credence2posted 4 years ago
Wilderness and L to L, I am relieved that both of you share the sentiment that Trump must step down if he loses this fall.
reply report
1. 60
  Live to Learnposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  If the results are incredible fishy I don't support Biden stepping up any more than Trump not stepping down.
  reply report
  79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Yes but they need to be pretty incredible
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Would you consider it "pretty incredible" if tens of thousands of votes are "lost" somehow? or hundreds of votes in a single state are found to be illegal, without a thorough search?
  
  Or does "pretty incredible" just encompass another win by Republicans?
  reply report
  60
  Live to Learnposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Sadly, recent history show us the left will label anything credible, no matter how fishy, if that result suits their purposes.
  reply report
  79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Funny, I have heard the same thing about the rabid right......
  reply report
  60
  Live to Learnposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  You've heard that about the right. We've all seen it with the left.
  
  I'll trust my eyes over hearsay.
  reply report
  79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  The only thing is you are not the only one with a pair of eyes? So, your "facts" are my hearsay. What makes YOU think that your view is the sole and exclusive correct one?
  
  More of the obtuseness and the out and out plain arrogance of the Rightwinger species....
  
  So, one can choose believe their own lying eyes or look at the statistics on the ground itself?
  
  https://www.voanews.com/usa/four-extrem … t-violence
  reply report
  95
  Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  This is a fact from the link you provided. It has no proof of anything and only "unconfirmed reports." So, why would anyone value an unconfirmed report and believe it is proof of anything? I can cite unconfirmed reports all day, I don't because it is propaganda.
  
  From the link you provided
  
  "Minnesota Governor Tim Walz cited unconfirmed reports Saturday that white supremacists had been behind violent protests in Minneapolis where Floyd, who was African American, died last Monday.
  reply report
  71
  Ken Burgessposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Unsubstantiated and unproven you mean.
  
  Like many things created by the Liberal Media.
  
  Like how Trump is a Russian conspirator/puppet... that they had absolute proof of, until it was proven beyond a doubt they didn't.
  
  Or how Mr. Floyd was deliberately and maliciously murdered, until the bodycam footage from the police showed he wasn't. It was tragic, even callous, but not premeditated or directly intended.
  
  Another "fact" the liberal media will conveniently avoid reporting on because it doesn't fit their agendas or bias.
  
  At some point in time, a rational and observant individual is forced to notice how issue after issue, is reported with bias, or outright false information. A scary thought...
  
  Because it proves there are still many that are neither rational or observant enough to recognize what is being fed to them. There are plenty of Americans that still believe CNN is news.
  reply report
  79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Sorry, I was a bit rushed let me provide a better source of evidence, unless you all are going to tell me that it is liberally biased. But that is the same explanations you all always give when data is contrary to what ideas you have already embraced, regardless of the facts. So, you tell me who have proven the most dangerous beyond having paint thrown upon them?
  
  https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalatin … ted-states
  reply report
  84
  GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  You are right, this link is a more credible source. Is someone arguing that Right-wing extremists aren't real and aren't dangerous?
  
  It just looks, to me, like a topical point. I don't think it is the Right-wing extremists behind the current looting and rioting violence that is being discussed, and I think that is the intended point—even if it does come off appearing otherwise.
  
  GA
  reply report
  79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  L to L was on the warpath against the left as being the bigger threat, I just wanted to bring the proper perspective to this discussion as to where most of the violence and disruption actually comes from.
  
  I think the rioting and looting are coming from common criminals and anarchists, not "naturally peaceful" left leaning people who dared to bring a prickly topic to the public's attention through overwhelmingly peaceful protests.
  reply report
  60
  Live to Learnposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  I don't see it as a prickly subject, but as one we have been grappling with as a nation for our entire lifetime. A subject now being hijacked by racist whites who want to 'speak for' the problems faced by your community.
  
  Honestly, credence, if the left as a whole refuses to call out, support the arrests of, and unilaterally denounce those perpetuating and calling for violence, we are really just politely calling the violence 'far left'. We are pretending criminal elements we're opportunistically using the cause. They are really just an arm of the mainstream left.
  
  I hear the right denounce far right people. I see far right ideas pushed out of the conversation as they are exposed, and rightly so. I don't see anyone whitewashing violence perpetrated by far right extremists. I don't see anyone on the right ever making excuses for violence. The same cannot be said for those labeled left or far left.
  
  You can white wash the problems all you'd like,but the disparity, the double standards and the unbridled hypocrisy of the main stream left are there for all with eyes to see.
  
  You may consider your grievances finally being heard. I see your cause being marginalized and used for purposes of those whose goals have absolutely nothing to do with the American ideal the words BLM first implied. I see a democratic party foolish enough to believe they can use the current unrest to further their power. Power that has never done anything but provide lip service to your community in order to keep your vote inn their back pockets.
  
  What we have is an organized group whose stated agenda is the dismantling of a country head and shoulders above almost all others in equality and freedom. For what? The wanna be lynch mobs roaming streets of some cities?
  
  The looting is an expected by product that plays into the plans of those organizing and supporting these protests. If you support the protests you cannot then not take credit for the violence and the destruction associated with them.
  
  It's like you guys have been saying for years. If you simply voted Trump, you take responsibility for the outcome. You support the riots so you now have to accept responsibility for the outcome. All of it.
  reply report
  79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Over how many centuries do we have to continue to grapple with it, L to L? It is as old as the pyramids and still just as contentious as ever.
  
  If it is any consolation for you, I have disowned my support for BLM based on its stated goals and tactics. I am most disappointed in them. But no free pass will I give to the Right and Conservatives as they are no better. So, regardless, I still don't trust the "other side".
  report
  60
  Live to Learnposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Credence when we start looking at the problem squarely in the face, stop making excuses and pretending that there aren't factors well within the control of the black community which could change the dynamics for the better, we could see positive change and greater equity. But, I've got to tell you, a victim mentality will not do anything other than perpetuate the problems. This is one reason I oppose reparations. No amount of money will appease a victim mentality. It will just justify to the person claiming to be a victim that they are one.
  
  It would make things worse. Not better. And advocating racist behavior toward another ethnic group won't help either. If our goal is equality, retribution sets us back.
  report
  71
  Ken Burgessposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  You are free to think that, but you would be wrong.
  
  BLM is well funded (worth billions today) and well organized.
  
  The Chicago chapter is claiming looting is a right, is restitution.
  
  Antifa is well organized, spread throughout America and Europe.
  
  Their tactics and efforts are just like what we have seen in recent years past exhibited on campuses like Berkley and UCLA and so many others.
  
  What occurred at Evergreen College in 2017 on a National stage.
  
  Evergreen College didn't fare so well after the student 'revolution'.
  
  If America makes the wrong choices come November I imagine it will suffer a similarly poor outcome.
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIvDmhgZVNc
  
  Colleges have been churning these extremists out for years now, they are taking root in media and government positions, they want revolution and destruction, they do not want debate, they do not want moderate change.
  reply report
  79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Ken, I saw the statement from the Chicago chapter and it has been corroborated through several sources. If such is the case then I have to walk away from the organization and its tactics. As this attitude and behavior is not acceptable.
  
  I still say that there remains an issue regarding disparate police tactics in Black communities, but I can no longer have BLM represent me addressing this issue from my perspective, as they have stated a commitment to property damage as "restitution".
  
  This is by no means a desire by me to let the system off the hook. But I have to question those that bring a noble cause into the mud, bringing attention to the vital issue in negative way. Our enemies are certainly going to use this.
  
  Let the leftist oriented groups spread, but I insist on peaceful protest not that they be silent to appease the Right.
  
  I will not use this unfortunate event to paint a broad brush across all Left oriented protesters and groups.
  
  So, you may well have won this round.
  report
  71
  Ken Burgessposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  I haven't won anything.
  
  We are both losing.
  
  They are ultimately a threat to us all.
  
  The Evergreen College mob (multiplied by dozens of similar campuses with similar extremist activism that has usurped control) have taken to the real world, for years now...
  
  And their actions and efforts of revolution and destruction are supported by many Mayors and Councils in cities like NY, LA, Seattle, Portland.
  
  Mobilized against the populace and against State and Federal authorities.
  
  Looting is Reparations.
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  "I still say that there remains an issue regarding disparate police tactics in Black communities, but I can no longer have BLM represent me addressing this issue from my perspective, as they have stated a commitment to property damage as "restitution"."
  
  Credence, have you ever seen a study on police tactics, arrests, brutality, etc. between black and white communities of similar income levels, education, etc.? Preferably from the same city police force?
  
  I haven't, but have a strong suspicion that they aren't that much different. Problem is black poverty, and the crime that goes with it, not racial differences.
  report
  79
  Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  That is a good question, it will take a little time to sort out the variables, but I will check it out.
  report
  71
  Ken Burgessposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  The problem you, Wilderness, I and others that have been contributing in this and similar threads have... is that we are the "Old Guard".
  
  We are over 50, we remember 70s, some the 60s.
  
  We remember what the Democratic Party WAS... and some of us mistakenly feel it still is. We also remember what the Republican Party WAS.
  
  We can remember a time of systemic racism of segregation of busing.
  
  We handle things in a different way than the younger generations, partly because we lived through those times... we aren't reading them from a book or being taught a biased perspective from a radical professor.
  
  Partly because we are more mature, and come from a time when reasoning things out, without violence, without destroying the other person, was a preferred method. The high road, using reason and intelligence over brute force and power.
  
  This younger generation, what I will call the 'Evergreen College Mob' has a process, uses tactics, and acts in a complete opposite way.
  
  They don't want to reason with opposing views, they want to silence them.
  
  They don't want to seek out every peaceful reasonable alternative first, they go right to physical confrontation, from invading other's space to outright violent assault.
  
  They don't seek compromise, they demand.
  
  And this is not a small group of individuals, these are tens of thousands of graduates that have studied and graduated with degrees that focus on these very concepts.
  
  Social Justice University -
  A Progressive University . Born out of necessity, Social Justice University (SJU) offers a modern solution. Free of negative social constructs, SJU is for woke individuals,
  
  Masters in Social Justice and Human Rights - ASU Online
  
  Social Justice Studies - Miami University
  
  MA Social Justice - Lakehead University
  
  Social Justice Certificate - Harvard
  
  Critical Theory - Graduate Center, CUNY
  
  Critical Theory - University of California, Berkeley
  
  Critical Theory - University of Maryland
  
  Just some examples... this is the MAJOR change in American Universities... America once had the greatest STEM Universities in the world, the largest amount of STEM graduates.
  
  The way America churned out engineers and scientists was the envy of the world.
  
  Today we are churning out revolutionaries, China today graduates 8 times the amount of STEM graduates from Universities that America does.
  report
  84
  GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  This calls for the infamous *SMH*. There is no rationalization for this.
  
  I have heard, (but not verified), that there are now Social Justice Liberal Arts degrees. *SMH*
  
  GA
  report
  84
  GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  In the instance of these riots and the looting violence, I think she is right. Relative to a historical perspective I think your last link shows your point is also right.
  
  But the discussion wasn't about the historical record.
  
  GA
  reply report
95
Readmikenowposted 4 years ago
reply report
1. 85
  Sharlee01posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Good one...
  reply report
80
Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years ago
Biden/Harris: Wear a mask cuz this COVID THING is everything.

Young voters: "We cannot go to polling stations and vote with ballot boxes like you guys used to do before this COVID THING! We have to have Mail-In voting, otherwise we'll get really sick and die due to this COVID THING."

Everybody else: "Okay maybe the youth is right, I mean they've always been so PRECIOUS."

Result of fraudulent, risky Mail-In voting: Biden/Harris win. (Or worse ... anarchy, chaos, civil war ... oh the future looks bleak. )

Yay for China.
reply report
95
Readmikenowposted 4 years ago
reply report
92
Abby Slutskyposted 4 years ago
But then again the hate on all sides is really embarrassing. May God bless America.
reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Democrats who won't accept Presidential election results

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Democrats who won't accept Presidential election results

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies