3 hours ago, DRW50 said:

 

Agreed. (with Khan as well) I wonder if they were afraid if something was found they wouldn't be able to get involved? It's just sloppy. And it makes me wonder if the investigations against her are going to start up again, out of pure pettiness. 

 

 

I'm wondering about that too. 

 

Oh well. Now that Hillary is tossing her hat into the ring, she might as well go all out. I'd demand a recount on all the states that seemed sketchy too. That's why I said they need to add Florida and Georgia to the list too if possible.

Just now, Nothin'ButAttitude said:

 

 

I'm wondering about that too. 

 

Oh well. Now that Hillary is tossing her hat into the ring, she might as well go all out. I'd demand a recount on all the states that seemed sketchy too. That's why I said they need to add Florida and Georgia to the list too if possible.

 

Your talk about Georgia and some other close states reminded me of this article where some Democrats there and in Arizona are unhappy that they're being overlooked because of angst about the Rust Belt.

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/democrats-rust-belt-dilemma-231842

18 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

 

Your talk about Georgia and some other close states reminded me of this article where some Democrats there and in Arizona are unhappy that they're being overlooked because of angst about the Rust Belt.

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/democrats-rust-belt-dilemma-231842

 

I've been saying for the longest on here that Democrats should've put their focus back in GA. They could've won this state over with ease had Hillary or one of her surrogates came here and did work. They could've possibly won the Senate seat here for Jim Barksdale but the DNC didn't even bother to toss dollars behind him for advertisement till it was too late. I don't even remember there being a state debate for the seat. If so, it was never advertised. 

 

But to Barksdale, there were so many sketchy things he and the DNC could've brought to light about Johnny Isakson that they didn't. 

 

Going forward, Democrats need to start investing in the down-ticket too and not just the top of ticket. 

 

Interesting interview with Noam Chomsky on the new 'Trump era': 

 

 

Edited November 27, 20169 yr by Nothin'ButAttitude

Hilary conceeded she needs to accept the results. the democrats need to move foward and plan for 2020. 

28 minutes ago, Nothin'ButAttitude said:

 

I've been saying for the longest on here that Democrats should've put their focus back in GA. They could've won this state over with ease had Hillary or one of her surrogates came here and did work. They could've possibly won the Senate seat here for Jim Barksdale but the DNC didn't even bother to toss dollars behind him for advertisement till it was too late. I don't even remember there being a state debate for the seat. If so, it was never advertised. 

 

But to Barksdale, there were so many sketchy things he and the DNC could've brought to light about Johnny Isakson that they didn't. 

 

Going forward, Democrats need to start investing in the down-ticket too and not just the top of ticket. 

 

She actually lost Arizona and Georgia by a smaller margin than Ohio! I thought she was making a go at Arizona.  

 

I would have stayed out of the recount. Trump is so unpredictable and petty... He'd hire someone to go after her in a heartbeat. He'd probably change his mind 2 minutes later, but I wouldn't risk it. Republicans may have said a ton of nice things about her throughout the years, but their actions speak louder. Most of them dislike her and have forever...

 

I recently read this: 

 

As Time magazine noted as far back as 1993, cranking out spurious stories that discredited Hillary Clinton and were attributed to anonymous Secret Service agents was a known political trick: 

 

A Republican consultant told a network newscaster that his job was to make sure Hillary Clinton is discredited before the 1996 campaign. Each day anti-Hillary talking points go out to talk-show hosts. Many of the stories are attributed to the Secret Service in an attempt to give the tales credibility.

 

3 hours ago, OzFrog said:

 

Regardless of who's getting involved where, it's worth it just to see Trump, Conway et al have complete meltdowns online as has already started to happen.

 

This is election soap opera at its finest.

 

The title of Trump's statement was so funny... "Ridiculous Recount Request" was in it. I think it should have just said "Recount Request." I actually don't think the recount itself is ridiculous (in Wisconsin and Michigan anyway), but those 2 states aren't enough, and I wish her campaign had stayed out of it. 

 

Edited November 27, 20169 yr by Ms. Quartermaine

Democrats and Republicans will be observing the recount regardless of the fact that Stein initiated it.

Trump should show the confidence that he purports to have and just let the recount happen. He's as thin-skinned as hell.  Maybe losing the popular vote by millions has made him even more insecure (if that's even possible).

 

Thanks NBA for the Chomsky interview. I appreciate that he's trying to give honest answers and not red meat. The interview kept asking leading questions so I took a break after about 6 minutes.

42 minutes ago, DramatistDreamer said:

Democrats and Republicans will be observing the recount regardless of the fact that Stein initiated it.

Trump should show the confidence that he purports to have and just let the recount happen. He's as thin-skinned as hell.  Maybe losing the popular vote by millions has made him even more insecure (if that's even possible).

 

 

Edited to add:

 

Why are Democrats the ones to win popular vote and lose the election?! Luck of the draw, I guess. I looked it up and the 5 times it's happened, it's been the Dems... except for one candidate that was listed as Democrat-Republican, but back then, everyone was Democrat-Republican (or Whig or Federalist, I guess). It was 1824 and after the loss, they were inspired to create the Democratic party. 

 

 

 

Edited November 27, 20169 yr by Ms. Quartermaine

3 hours ago, Nothin'ButAttitude said:

 

 

I'm wondering about that too. 

 

Oh well. Now that Hillary is tossing her hat into the ring, she might as well go all out. I'd demand a recount on all the states that seemed sketchy too. That's why I said they need to add Florida and Georgia to the list too if possible.

There is a lot of stories of voter suppression out there (like polling places closing an hour earlier), so that could explain a lot of things

There is a pro-Russia Serbian mercenary who has much to say about Russia's machinations in Europe: in short, they have been busy busy busy bees.

 

Finger Pointed at Russians in Alleged Coup Plot in Montenegro

 

This Op-Ed piece speaks to yet another way that a group's members can vote against their own interests.

 

What Unions Got Wrong About Trump

 

“There’s an irony here,” he said. “Unions are probably the most consistent voice for the broad middle class of any organization today, yet the voice of the middle class was seen as an important part of Donald Trump’s victory. The further decline of labor is going to hurt many members of the middle class.”

 

 

Edited November 27, 20169 yr by DramatistDreamer

Longform and worth the read due to its detailed chronology of events, putting the puzzle pieces together to form the overall picture.

 

How Russia Pulled Off the Biggest Election Hack in U.S. History

 

So Trump is questioning the legitimacy of an election...that he won? Because HRC joined the recount effort?  Hillary showing us all how fast Trump can implode once the 'mask of civility' falls off.

 

Donald Trump is now questioning the legitimacy of the election he won

 

If the Democrats were going to rig the election, I'm pretty sure, they'd rig it so that their candidate won both the Electoral College and the Popular Vote, not just the Popular Vote which can still lose the election.

The article is trying to stretch a lot out of a typical delusional Trump tweet. Trump obviously believes the vote was rigged against him and he knows many brain dead supporters of his do as well. He then says he won in spite of rigging. Turning it into his saying the election wasn't legitimate is some type of self-pleasing forest-for-trees-itis. It's ironic that the article says he lost the thread of his own argument as that's basically what the journalist does when he turns it into whataboutery - what about another 9/11, what about this, what about that. That's a lot more serious than a tweet that is by Trump standards fairly mild. You'd think things like the pathetic and childish and patronizing reactions from Trump and the GOP over bringing "freedom" to Cuba post-Castro (essentially just enabling anti-American hardliners in Cuba, likely alienating Trump's business cronies so it doesn't even make any financial sense, all just to beat their chests and stick their tongues out at Obama over something that 90% of the public doesn't give a rat's ass about) would warrant that type of article, not a tweet. I'm more unsure every day that liberals will be able to avoid shooting themselves in the foot and staring at their own navels these coming 4 years. 

Edited November 27, 20169 yr by DRW50

Well, I think they had a point with this:

 

4. The nightmare scenario in 2016 was that Trump would refuse to accept the outcome of the election when he was a mere candidate. Imagine if he were to refuse to accept the outcome of the next election once he is the president, and after he has appointed loyalists to control America’s security apparatus.

 

Although I'm not super worried about it at this point.

Has anyone seen Google maps lately? I don't know if this is still the case but when I looked this morning it was...Trump Tower in Manhattan was listed as Dump Tower.