Donald Trump

[west didsblue]

Unless Harris wins by huge margins, I think it probably will.

The idiot hates the idea that he’s a loser.

Talking of which, after Biden had won Georgia, and his overall victory was confirmed, CNN seemed to use "loser" as often as they could, when talking about Trump.

Irrespective of the margin, Trump and his cult will do everything they can to get the result nullified including getting electoral college delegates to vote the opposite way to the popular vote and using the Supreme Court where he can to change the outcome in some states.

 

[west didsblue]

He will be on about brexit too most likely.

Probably

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

He will be on about brexit too most likely.

I reckon so too. You know what he's like - probably a Russian bot.

 

[FlemishDuck]

He will be on about brexit too most likely.

On the mater of legitimacy? I can see the point of contention coming. Politicians deciding to only to hold a referendum when they choose to for a result which their polls deem it to be "the right moment" to hold it seems like such a deft manipulative move, especially if those polls were extra affected by certain anti-Eu media campaigns ahah.

But thats more and more what seems to define the danger to our democracies, politicias manipulating and skewing the rules to their favor for speciific powermoves and often legitimized in a fashion where its all justified because it acts against the opposition, basicly "the dirtyness of my opponent legitimizes my dirtyness" ... o boi.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

She’s still a ****, though.

And a racist one too.

She's a fucking horror show.

 

[FlemishDuck]

And a racist one too.

She's a fucking horror show.

The whole of fox beats Dali in sheer surrealist output. Atleast from time to Time Rupert gets to pay a big ass fine for the nonsense that his troopers sell and he has to relegate one back to the twilight zone.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

Worth noting it's not just trump that finds it hard to accept an election result nowadays although admittedly he's the only one to mobilise armed red necks. The good liberal folk of the world find it just as tough to accept results that don't go their way and ascribe any such outcome as russian interference or because of lies etc.

Dumb.

There's a difference between influencing an election result and ignoring/denying it.

Also, what happened in 2000?

 

[SebastianBlue]

Worth noting it's not just trump that finds it hard to accept an election result nowadays although admittedly he's the only one to mobilise armed red necks. The good liberal folk of the world find it just as tough to accept results that don't go their way and ascribe any such outcome as russian interference or because of lies etc.

I have seen you make countless intelligent, insightful, cogent points on various subjects.

Which is why it is strange to see you making such a silly (and false) comparison between the electorate, political sphere, and intelligence apparatus analysing what may have lead to the 2016 election outcome and the sitting president of the US colluding with numerous bad actors from many different realms (including state legislatures that swore loyalty to Trump rather then the US) to attempt to overturn the 2020 election and prevent the peaceful, lawful transfer of power. That included inciting a mob to storm the Capital building—with a small contingent even looking to hang his own Vice President—spearheading a scheme to send fake electors to the capital to the capital to change the results of a free and fair election, calling a state election official and “asking” him to “find votes” so he could win that state, and by many reputable reports, being on the verge of firing the AG to replace him with a loyal lieutenant that would declare the results of the election invalid and rally the resources of the executive branch to keep him in power whilst the results were challenged all the way to the Supreme Court the president had filled with his own judges.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

I have seen you make countless intelligent, insightful, cogent points on various subjects.

Which is why it is strange to see you making such a silly (and false) comparison between the electorate, political sphere, and intelligence apparatus analysing what may have lead to the 2016 election outcome and the sitting president of the US colluding with numerous bad actors from many different realms (including state legislatures that swore loyalty to Trump rather then the US) to attempt to overturn the 2020 election and prevent the peaceful, lawful transfer of power. That included inciting a mob to storm the Capital building—with a small contingent even looking to hang his own Vice President—spearheading a scheme to send fake electors to the capital to the capital to change the results of a free and fair election, calling a state election official and “asking” him to “find votes” so he could win that state, and by many reputable reports, being on the verge of firing the AG to replace him with a loyal lieutenant that would declare the results of the election invalid and rally the resources of the executive branch to keep him in power whilst the results were challenged all the way to the Supreme Court the president had filled with his own judges.

He's a reaction generator. Don't feed him.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Dumb.

There's a difference between influencing an election result and ignoring/denying it.

Also, what happened in 2000?

The difference is people you agree with getting upset Vs people you don't agree with getting upset about an election result. As you say - dumb.