473
We've regressed from Stop the Count! to Why Count?!
Next it'll be "how count? "
Haha exactly, it'll be 'I got dis many counts' and show a measure of length between hands
load more comments
(1 replies)
Trump said polls suggested he was at “93 percent” although it was not clear what that number was referring to
I just assumed they meant his diaper
not working....
better
My day was better before I had to look at creepy weird old man crotch
Here's the perfect antidote!
This whole thread is just disgusting.
The name of the sub is Politics so… yea.
In the first image, he must be polling at like 110% lol.
Who leaked that poll?
Prolly some librul who's against trickle down economics
I could see an argument for the first pic being a shadow. Wouldn't believe it, but it's slightly plausible at a glance.
Oh boy, that second pic... That just can't be fat, can it?!
There're other diaper photos, but with AI and deep fakes, nevermind shadows, angles, effects, etc. of days gone by...who really knows anymore.
Plus, delete your search history if you venture.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Well Donald we are having an election so we can show you how many people despise you and your MAGA traitors.
51% of the voting population (66%) by the 2020 popular vote. That's what someone might call actually a big fucking problem if you stop and think about those numbers for a moment.
"Dear America: You are waking up, as Germany once did, to the awareness that 1/3 of your people would kill another 1/3, while 1/3 watches."
- Werner Twertzog aka Professor William Pannapacker
To be fair, Trump actually only got 47%, with the rest going to spoiler candidates.
So it's closer to 30% of America wants to kill 33% of America.
so you can hopefully lose the election a second time, and the popular vote a third time.
They're intentionally saying this to cast doubt and challenge the election results, no matter how badly they lose.
If we can't get some of them to turn their conspiracy theory around and establish faith in our fair election process, then we're going to be dealing with this forever and ever.
Bush v. Gore was the end of democracy for us it turns out. That set a precedent we're not able to recover from today.
Bush v. Gore was the end of democracy for us it turns out. That set a precedent we’re not able to recover from today.
No less than three of Bush's lawyers are on SCOTUS now, BTW.
Their reward for being good puppets of the heritage foundation :(
Yep. They are preparing the ground for another putsch. Trump's not legally eligible to hold the office, so maybe he has a point...
https://protectdemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/PD_County-Cert-WP_v03.1.pdf
Trump and his MAGA flying monkeys (who are not nearly as addled in the head as he himself is) have every intention of disrupting the counting and certification of votes in as many jurisdictions as possible in order to throw the election to the House (one state, one vote) or SCOTUS. When he questions "why are we having an election" it's because he's trying to stop us from having elections under his dictatorship and is floating the idea in advance to normalize it.
This is why he's going to keep repeating that he's winning by absurd margins. He'll have Magoos convinced that it was an obviously stolen election because "how could he have won 90+% of votes in polls but still lose???"
Even Russia pretended to have an election.
Even Best Korea makes everyone fill out a ballot paper
Who didn't have an election?
I suppose I shouldn't be looking for meaning in anything he says.
I think he’s referring to the DNC not having primaries. But with a sitting president parties don’t really have primaries to pick a candidate. But since Harris moved into Biden’s place on the ticket, Trump has been whining about how it’s unfair 🙄.
But then he gets all discombobulated and complains about having to deal with an election even though he was also just made the GOP candidate without any primary elections (I think?). At that point I lose the thread as he devolves into sundowning.
The GOP had primaries. Trump won without attending any of the GOP primary debates.
As I've been quoting since last year in regards to the GOP:
can't win a primary without Trump, can't win a general with him.
Where are these rules documented so that the violations may be cited?
"< crickets >"
-- #maga
The best anyone can make sense of it is that the Dems didn't exactly have an open primary to select Harris. So he's ?? confusing that with why have a general election? Which still doesn't make any sense but that's the best explanation.
That's definitely what he meant. He's whined about it before.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Guy’s fucked in the head. It’s all verbal diarrhea.
Oh, he doesn't want an election now? So he just wants Biden or Harris to remain in office?
I mean, Roberts did basically declare Biden king.
In days long ago, one could dismiss such rhetorical musings as fantasy. Then Jan 6th happened, and all that followed, including the GOP falling in behind.
This anti-democratic cult must be crushed.
load more comments
(3 replies)
I just want to be super rude to him. "Because the assassin missed. It's not like you are going to respect the results anyway. The demographics that were against you in 2020 have only gotten worse."
Alright, I’m more than a bit confused about this one. He stated that democrats didn’t hold a real primary and went on to question why they would need a presidential election. How is A related to B? It reminds me of the ubiquitous casual stochastic terrorism of the early 2010s in its complete absence of logic or adherence to reality.
It's a 'why have rules at all if we're going to ignore them' whine about how Harris didn't have to win a primary.
Not that it makes it much more clear, but he's talking about the nomination. He's saying Harris didn't have to go through a traditional primary, so... either he's saying a) retroactively he shouldn't have had to either, or b) since he won the primaries, and Harris didn't have to... then he should just automatically be president and skip the whole "election where are people can vote" thing.
Probably he meant both, that he shouldn't have to go through a primary or national election. He should just get to hand-pick a poll and get his crown.
Precisely to stop people like you, Donald.
To get rid of him. For good and all.
Because US Constitution, Article II, section 1?
"Article II
Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected"
MSNBC - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for MSNBC:
MBFC: Left - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
New York Times - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for New York Times:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
Media Bias Fact Check | bot supportSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trumps-unsettling-new-question-are-election-rcna167196
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/one-democratic-criticism-seems-bother-trump-rcna163685
https://www.msnbc.com/the-weekend/watch/-sleepwalking-into-a-dictatorship-why-trump-poses-a-serious-threat-to-democracy-208497733803
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/08/17/us/trump-harris-election/f423d6f6-d305-5db3-b5ba-16cc4d6e7b4d
Mans is completely fucked.
pro-tip: If you don't want to be called a fascist, don't say fascist shit.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024
473 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19097 readers
2795 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS