Democrats who won't accept Presidential election results

Jump to Last Post 1-9 of 9 discussions (49 posts)
  1. Readmikenow profile image97
    Readmikenowposted 10 months ago

    https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/15146189.jpg
    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

    1. Ken Burgess profile image89
      Ken Burgessposted 10 months 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.

      1. Abby Slutsky profile image96
        Abby Slutskyposted 8 months 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.

    2. Sharlee01 profile image84
      Sharlee01posted 10 months 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.

      1. Credence2 profile image80
        Credence2posted 10 months 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.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image84
          Sharlee01posted 10 months 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.

          1. Credence2 profile image80
            Credence2posted 10 months 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.

  2. Credence2 profile image80
    Credence2posted 10 months 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.

  3. Live to Learn profile image79
    Live to Learnposted 10 months 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.

    1. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 10 months 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

      1. Live to Learn profile image79
        Live to Learnposted 10 months 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.

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 10 months 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.

  4. Readmikenow profile image97
    Readmikenowposted 10 months 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

    1. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 10 months 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?

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 10 months 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.

        1. Credence2 profile image80
          Credence2posted 10 months 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.

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 10 months 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.

      2. Readmikenow profile image97
        Readmikenowposted 10 months 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.

        1. Credence2 profile image80
          Credence2posted 10 months 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?

          1. Readmikenow profile image97
            Readmikenowposted 10 months 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.

  5. Credence2 profile image80
    Credence2posted 10 months 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.

    1. Live to Learn profile image79
      Live to Learnposted 10 months agoin reply to this

      If the results are incredible fishy I don't support Biden stepping up any more than Trump not stepping down.

      1. Credence2 profile image80
        Credence2posted 10 months agoin reply to this

        Yes but they need to be pretty incredible

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 10 months 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?

        2. Live to Learn profile image79
          Live to Learnposted 10 months 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.

          1. Credence2 profile image80
            Credence2posted 10 months agoin reply to this

            Funny, I have heard the same thing about the rabid right......

            1. Live to Learn profile image79
              Live to Learnposted 10 months 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.

              1. Credence2 profile image80
                Credence2posted 10 months 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

                1. Readmikenow profile image97
                  Readmikenowposted 10 months 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.

                  1. Ken Burgess profile image89
                    Ken Burgessposted 10 months 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.

                  2. Credence2 profile image80
                    Credence2posted 10 months 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

  6. Readmikenow profile image97
    Readmikenowposted 10 months ago

    https://hubstatic.com/15153767.jpg

    1. Sharlee01 profile image84
      Sharlee01posted 10 months agoin reply to this

      Good one...

  7. Kathryn L Hill profile image81
    Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months 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.

  8. Readmikenow profile image97
    Readmikenowposted 10 months ago

    https://hubstatic.com/15162830.jpg

  9. Abby Slutsky profile image96
    Abby Slutskyposted 8 months ago

    But then again the hate on all sides is really embarrassing. May God bless America.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis 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 ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis 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 LibrariesJavascript 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 SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis 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 YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis 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 LoginYou 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)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe 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 PixelsWe 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 AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore 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 PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)