So people are outraged by Trump not committing to accept election results? Remind me, did Al Gore accept in 2000?

No he has the 'support' of 30-40% of the country because they would vote for Charles Manson if he said he was a Republican and wouldn't raise taxes. It has nothing to do with some vast backlash against media which supposedly has such little influence now anyway due to social media. And yes Gore did accept the Supreme Court decision to halt the FL recount and conceded. Had he continued to fight thru the FL courts it likely would've tested the electoral college process in general.

I've got to go to bed. But take a look at what Bill Clinton said when he spoke to the nation in December of 2000.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/03/how-bill-clintons-statement-al-gores-2000-presidential-concession-evolved/359196/

In the 1st draft of his speech, he wanted to say this, ""Let me congratulate Vice President Gore on his principled defense of our most funadamental democratic value - the right of every citizen to vote, and have their vote count.""

So I assume something like that ended up in the speech. Trump hints he'd do something similar and he's now viewed as a monster.

rojo wrote:

So after getting irate that the Dodgers were getting crushed, I couldn't watch anymore and started watching the debate on tape.

Hold up, tape and not YouTube? I seem to recall that you still use Windows too. What is going on in the rojo residence of outdated technology???

Gore won the 2000 election. Hillary is hoping that Trump will give in like Gore did when there was fraud.

It would be stupid for Trump to give in in advance when it is known Hillary will be committing election fraud.

HobsJog wrote:

rojo wrote:

So after getting irate that the Dodgers were getting crushed, I couldn't watch anymore and started watching the debate on tape.

Hold up, tape and not YouTube? I seem to recall that you still use Windows too. What is going on in the rojo residence of outdated technology???

I'm typing on a chromebook.

"Tape" is serving a synonym for DVR. Don't be so literal people. Understand what the person is actual saying instead of trying to play gotcha to make you feel better to support a view point you aren't going to change.

I love hearing viewpoints that challenge my own. When I watch Orioles games, I often watch the 'away feed' to hear the other team's perspective. Try it, you might actually learn something.

rojo wrote:

HobsJog wrote:

Hold up, tape and not YouTube? I seem to recall that you still use Windows too. What is going on in the rojo residence of outdated technology???

I'm typing on a chromebook.

"Tape" is serving a synonym for DVR. Don't be so literal people. Understand what the person is actual saying instead of trying to play gotcha to make you feel better to support a view point you aren't going to change.

I love hearing viewpoints that challenge my own. When I watch Orioles games, I often watch the 'away feed' to hear the other team's perspective. Try it, you might actually learn something.

For what it's worth I agree with you on the topic, it is hypocritical. I was just giving you a ribbing for using old man lingo.

rojo wrote:

Trump didn't call for mob violence

Rojo, you make a great point. It's extremely ironic that all of the libs are outraged by this since the common theme uniting all of the Black Lives Matter protests is mob violence not accepting the rule of law or trying to get the law to do something they demand whether the facts are there or not.

rojo wrote:

[quote]HobsJog wrote:

I love hearing viewpoints that challenge my own. When I watch Orioles games, I often watch the 'away feed' to hear the other team's perspective. Try it, you might actually learn something.

What? Gore accepted the verdict of the courts. He contested whether gray zone ballots were correctly counted. He would not have been in court if he lost FL by 1000000 votes. These are widely published facts not opposing perspectives.

Trump is implying he will not accept losing the election due to conspiracy not voting errors. If Trump didn't have his foot permanently lodged in his own mouth, the media would stop 'rigging' the election.

RoJo you can't compare the 2 things. Bush did NOT win the election via any voting system and had it stolen for him by his power brokers all the way up to the Supreme Court in the 5-4 vote by party line. The court ruling was on the legitamacy of the re-count of votes in Florida that never were fully counted as they had the damn hanging chads. But those votes were eventually counted and overwhelmingly favored Gore. Yet Gore still accepted the decision. Everyone knew it was a stolen election.

Trump tonight wasn't just blasted for what he was saying on this issue, but on how he said it and in the context of his prior comments. He is undermining the legitamacy of our republic system of government and has no basis in fact ot say so. If he said well in 04 in Ohio some computers were programmed to steal votes then I would give him that but the only states still using machines with no paper trail like Ohio in 04 are all states with GOP Secretary of States.

Gore conceded to Bush and then withdrew the concession when all of the news organizations which said Bush had won Florida suddenly said "uh, no he didn't." He asked for a reasonable recount in a state which was close to tied and he abided by the result.

He never claimed the election was "rigged" and he certainly didn't claim it was rigged three weeks before it happened, which seems to be Trump's major campaign point.

There is no similarity to the Gore and Trump situations and Rojo among many others here should know that. You're either ignorant or dishonest. Most likely both.

Sorry when did Al Gore complain that the election was rigged before during and after the election?

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

Took in $177.8m in 2015 and paid out $6m in charity, that is terrible.

It's also not true.

Rojo,

Please stop. You're an idiot. And you're an embarrassment to us Republicans.

rojo wrote:

Zev wrote:

Gore won the popular vote.

What does that have to do with anything? Bush won the electoral vote.

So if Trump wins the popular vote, you are fine with him contesting it?

It just amazes me that people are expressing this faux outrage....

That's an impressive use of an Ivy League education...

Maybe a few years at a community college would, you know, teach you how the world works and how to navigate it.

I don't even know where to begin.

They asked if he LOST the election would he do what is expected and step down.

They didn't ask Trump a hypothetical question where Hilary wins the Electoral Votes but Trump wins the popular vote would be step and down and admit defeat without a protest.

The question was asking if HE WAS BEAT in the election. I think a freaking 3rd grader can figure out the moderator intent behind the question

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

rojo wrote:

What does that have to do with anything? Bush won the electoral vote.

So if Trump wins the popular vote, you are fine with him contesting it?

It just amazes me that people are expressing this faux outrage....

That's an impressive use of an Ivy League education...

Maybe a few years at a community college would, you know, teach you how the world works and how to navigate it.

I don't even know where to begin.

I know, Rojo, you are so tone deaf. Seriously it's like Mike Rossi racing Galen Rupp in a marathon and then Rossi decides to not accept Rupp's victory if he loses. This is not a close race like a photo finish which might require a review.

Dosnsnnssn wrote:

Sorry when did Al Gore complain that the election was rigged before during and after the election?

Shsshhh!! We can't use facts to make a decision. Trump says reality is rigged, so, no facts.

rojo wrote:

Zev wrote:

Gore won the popular vote.

What does that have to do with anything? Bush won the electoral vote.

So if Trump wins the popular vote, you are fine with him contesting it?

It just amazes me that people are expressing this faux outrage. If you hate Trump, I get it hate him. Hell George Wasahington was a freaking slave holder as were many of the Founding Fathers. Hate whoever you want but at least be intellectually honest.

This argument about 'not accepting election results' when he has no idea what might happen is absurd.

I haven't read the whole thread so maybe someone else has said this. Many politicians have questioned the results of an election AFTER the election has happened. In Gore's case there was legitimate reason to think he'd won Florida and yes, he did eventually accept the results even though it's still not clear that he lost. That's different than calling the whole process into question before even a single vote is cast.

Dosnsnnssn wrote:

Sorry when did Al Gore complain that the election was rigged before during and after the election?

Was there video of Republicans planning and discussing how they have been rigging elections for 50 years by having people vote in multiple states? This is exactly what the videos recently released show the Democrats doing. Was there video of Republicans coordinating with groups to incite violence at Gore events? This is what Democrat operative, Robert Creamer and others have been doing at Trump/Pence events. Strangely, Creamer is a felon who has visited the White House over 300 times, including 45 times to specifically visit President Obama.

Was there evidence released like the Podesta emails showing MSM reporters colluding with the Bush campaign? Was Bush given questions in advance, the way Donna Brazille - who at the time worked for CNN - provided Clinton? How about the revelations exposed about the NYT's, Washington Post, CNN's John Harwood, and others openly helping the Clinton campaign not only against Trump, but against Bernie Sanders? It is essential to have a media that isn't completely biased against one candidate. They were literally cheering for her during the debate in the holding pen tonight. Is that what we really want?

If the media only acts as a cheerleader to elect Clinton, do you think anything will change once she is elected? Of course not.