What If 2020 Was Just a Rehearsal?

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by Stanislav, Oct 7, 2021.

  1. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Who are you kidding?
    What I posted is from your Presidential candidate top Democrat.
    You are making it 100% or noting but the reality is that there was good % of Left politicians who claimed that Trumps victory and presidency was illegitimate.
    Starting with Hillary as late as 2019 TV interview.
    And others that I mentioned before.
    Not mentioning what I saw and read on the left biased media last 5 years.
    I'm not ignoring you High accuracy report because there was a good % of Dem's politicians who were ready to work with Trump on the issues.
    You can check the sources, like the NY Times article and not rely on opinion.
    YOU can find the interview with Hillary - Presidential candidate who clearly stated what I quoted.
    What else do you need?

    I'm moving on.
  2. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    You are lying.

    You produced an interview of Hillary where she never said that Trump's election was illegitimate and then you posted some quoted stuff that you claimed was from her but had no source linked.

    You made the false statement many times that because Democrats said bad things about Trump that it proved your lie true.

    You produced some Fox News pundits watching some clips of Dems taken out of context and then lying that the Dems were claiming that Trump was not legitimately elected.

    You made a stupid argument that because Democrats impeached the criminal that they were saying he was not legitimately elected.

    You produced a twitter feed of someone that said Trump was not legitimate and then made the ridiculous stupid braindead claim it proved that the left in general was claiming that.

    You claimed that you, who watches no left-biased media, knew better what the left was saying only because you listen to pundits on Fox News telling that lie. When I said it wasn't true you said search and you'll find Thousands of example. You found one one goddamn Twitter. We could probably find more people on Twitter claiming the world was flat!

    You ignored the fact that I produced two articles from Very High Accuracy sources that debunked your lie.

    Regarding you claiming to move on, I predict that you will repeat this lie again in the future.
  3. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    I looked it up, you claim she was our presidential candidate, that interview was from 2020. therefore you are caught in another lie. Joe Biden was the presidential candidate not Hillary Clinton. She was most definitely NOT the top Democrat. How stupid do you think I am?
  4. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    "Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig likes it." --Attributed to several.
  5. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    I never thought you are stupid. But in our exchanges you hold tight to a position right or wrong.
    In the interview she was talking about when she was running against Trump ( i.e she was the top Democrat at the time and a presidential candidate) in 2016 and her loss in 2016. Not sure what you found.
    In 2020 interview she was urging Biden not to concede .
    I think she meant not to cave in to any pressures challenging elections results.
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2021
  6. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Bill, before rushing in and accusing someone of lying.
    Take a few deep breaths and calm down.
    As far as I know Washington Post is mostly factual - LEFT-CENTER BIAS

    Here is one such article:


    Now you see that I'm not lying and you are making false accusations.

    By Colby Itkowitz
    September 26, 2019
  7. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    In my opinion it is better to be considered stupid than dishonest.
  8. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member



    Trump actively trying to install a Governor who is willing to nullify the will of voters and throw a slate of electors to his advantage, in a key battleground state. This is Russia-level cheating, making the whole concept of electoral democracy moot. And Lerner here says, in all seriousness, that HRC (correctly) pointing out Russian involvement in Trump's win is somehow the same thing. Dear God.
  9. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    That is another issue and a serious one.
    I guess it points to the exploiting a weakness of the system.
    Governor shouldn't be able to overturn and not certify election unless the court proven beyond a doubt that there was irregularity and fraud.
    If not fraud not proven such governor should be impeached and removed from office.
    I ask a question, does Governor have the authority to overrule elections?
    What is the state law requires?
    Its one thing to say or make campaign declarations and another to be able to really deliver on them.
    Governors are not kings or are they?
  10. AirborneRanger

    AirborneRanger New Member

    First off, kudos to you for debating with B and S. As D mentioned, you are wrestling with pigs. Having said that, I don't think the state governor certifies their states votes, the secretary of state for each state does.
  11. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Thanks for the vote of confidence.
    Apparently, in Arizona he/she does. Kari Lake wouldn't have certified November results. Now, it's a simple yes-or-no question: if you were in Arizona, would you vote for this person? In Republican primary, and in general? In other words, does stated willingness to disregard democratic process bring more support from everyday Republican voters, or less?
    Donald Trump, for one, thinks that when GOP voters are offered choice between him and democracy, they'd pick him. And it's not like anyone knows these voters better than he does.

    There's no Republican party anymore. There is like one handful Republicans in congress, total: there's Joe Manchin, a DINO with traditional Republican sensibilities (caring about "competitiveness" (aka "growth", meaning low corporate tax) and "work requirements/entitlements" (poor shaming). There's Romney, a supply-sider corporate fundamentalist. There's Liz Cheney, a legacy neocon/military-industrial plutocrat Republican. These are the people still willing to work in the framework of the Republic, and they are a teeny tiny minority in what used to be their party. The rest are pro-insurrection MAGA party, out of conviction or political calculation (same difference to me). And their voters are there for them. Whether it's being misinformed or "deplorable", the result is the same. I know they are good people, we're talking pretty much all my neighbors down here. But they are propping up an increasingly fascist party, and that's scary
  12. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    And in my opinion it's even better to be considered smart and honest.
  13. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Here is a summary of our discussion about the false statement that the Democrats have been questioning the legitimacy of Trump's 2016 election over the past four years.

    This is a lie that Lerner has heard over and over again on Fox News and likely other right biased media sources. I've given some examples of Trump saying simlar things at the end of this post. The first time that I called Lerner out on telling this lie was a few months ago. It's been discussed off and on as he keeps repeating this lie on different occasions. I'll try to summarize this discussion for my convenience for the next time that Lerner repeats this lie.

    Lerner recently linked some quotes of Hilary Clinton that seemed to indicate she said that Trump's election victory was illegitimate. Lerner didn't provide a link to any source to allow verification. I later searched for it and found a different Hillary interview where she said the same thing. Lerner made the claim that since Clinton was the Democratic nominee for President in 2016 and she made this statement in 2019 and 2020 that it proved the Democrats in general are in general saying this. Of course, that is not sufficient.

    The first time I pointed out this false statement and asked Lerner to support his false statement, he tried to brush me off with the statement that it has been repeated many thousands of times by the left and that I should do my own search.

    I didn't let Lerner get away with that and he tried many failed attempts to provide any evidence of these thousands of examples he falsely claimed were out there before these last two Hillary Clinton interviews were found.

    Lerner kept claiming that Democrats said bad things about Trump and that it proved the lie true that they were claiming that Trump's election was illegitimate.

    Lerner produced some Fox News pundits watching some clips of Dems taken out of context and then lying that the Dems were claiming that Trump was not legitimately elected.

    Lerner repeated many times that because Democrats impeached the criminal that they were saying he was not legitimately elected. This is way that Trump himself most often uses this lie for his own benefit.

    Lerner produced a twitter feed of someone that said Trump was not legitimate and then made the ridiculous stupid braindead claim it proved that the left in general was claiming that.

    Here's an article from High Accuracy sources that debunked this lie.

    Democrats, for the most part, have avoided attributing Hillary Clinton’s defeat directly to Russian machinations. They have more readily blamed James Comey, the former F.B.I. director, for reversing Clinton’s thin lead in the final days of the campaign by reopening a criminal investigation into her mishandling of classified e-mails. Many have also expressed frustration with Clinton’s weak performance as a candidate, and with her campaign’s tactical errors. Instead of investigating whether Russia tipped the electoral scales on its own, they’ve focussed on the possibility that Trump colluded with Russia, and that this, along with other crimes, might be exposed by the probe being conducted by the special counsel, Robert Mueller.



    All through Trump's presidency Trump was lying about the Democrats attacking him about the 2016 election. Here's a couple of examples from the Washington Post database of the 30,573 false and misleading statements that Trump made during his term in office.
    OCT 10 2019
    “All of our nation's gains are put at risk by a rage filled Democrat Party that has gone completely insane. For nearly three years, Democrats have waged a non-stop battle to overturn your vote, overrule your voice, override your values and overthrow the results of the most spectacular election in the history of our country 2016.”

    OCT 04 2019
    “Not only are the Do Nothing Democrats interfering in the 2020 Election, but they are continuing to interfere in the 2016 Election. They must be stopped!”

    Similar false and misleading statements were repeated 115 times over Trump's Presidency.


    Caveat, I understand that trying to discuss things with Lerner actually doesn't make much sense on my part. I still do it because it amuses me. The reason it doesn't really make sense to try to discuss things with Lerner is three-fold. First, I'm convinced that he doesn't really read the posts. He apparently has absolutely no interest in what anyone else has to say. . He just skims the posts quickly. Hence I'll place this caveat here and he probably won't even see it. hehe Second, he doesn't really ever spend much time thinking about his posts. Instead he just throws shit against the proverbial wall to see what sticks. Third, Lerner considers this all as just bullshitting. A bullshitter does not care whether what s/he says is true or not, as long as it advances their cause. So Lerner just tries to fit into that mold. Another forum member explained Lerner to me this way and it rings very true. As an example, Lerner's reaction in the Predictions thread when it was pointed out his statement was not true he just responded that he didn't say what he obviously said.
  14. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    How ego refuses to admit being wrong.
    False statements by all sides is nothing new.
    Look at how each presidential contender within their own party trash each other in the debates only to become best bodies after the debates.
    Bill, I make a lot of sense to other readers who are not diehard apologists for the Dem's and some are.
    Articles from high accuracy sources can be politically biased to score political points. How naive one has to be to trust these, I remember one such article that gave the state of Ohio to Obama.
    Your Dem's apologetic and turn tables to accuse others of lies when the truth is presented are obvious.
    The more truth is town at you the longer your replies trying to deny it.
    The last example is perfect


    Now you see that I'm not lying and you are making false accusations.

    By Colby Itkowitz
    September 26, 2019
    Hillary Clinton dismissed President Trump as an “illegitimate president” and suggested that “he knows” that he stole the 2016 presidential election in a CBS News interview to be aired Sunday.

    The former secretary of state, who lost the presidency to Trump, offered a scathing assessment of the president, his 2016 win and the latest allegations that he tried to obtain incriminating information from a foreign government about Joe Biden, a possible 2020 opponent, according to excerpts released by CBS from a wide-ranging pretaped interview.

    The investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller concluded that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 election “in sweeping and systematic fashion” with the goal of helping Trump and harming Clinton. But the report drew no conclusion about whether the interference changed the result, and did not establish a criminal conspiracy by the Trump campaign.
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2021
  15. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    All of this debate fails to change a very simple fact. One major political party has abandoned democratic principles and had made its central theme to retain minority power by any means available.
  16. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Than you for verifying everything I said. Especially the parts of my post that you didn't read! :)

    Addressing the only new point in your post that is not already addressed in the post that you're responding to, specifically you said, "Bill, I make a lot of sense to other readers who are not diehard apologists for the Dem's and some are."

    Of course you make a lot of sense to people that that only watch Fox News or even less accurate media sources. This is a lie repeated there very often. I'm sure you believe every word as do other folks that only watch mediocre accuracy media sources like that. So you don't know that it is lie. That is what is so special and amusing to me. It is a lie about the left media and what is said there. It is obvious to us folks on the left that it is a lie because if we haven't watched one of those two Hillary interviews we would have probably never heard it said. It's an obvious lie to us. Now I argue it is completely fair to call it a lie and occasionally even calling you a liar for repeating the lie because I provided proof from a High accuracy sourced article that it is not true. Yet you keep repeating it. Now I understand it is actually very unlikely you have ever read my quote from that article let alone the article, as I explained already in my posts that you probably didn't read. :D
  17. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Unfortunately very true.
  18. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    It appears that some in that party indeed, but the party has vision and its democratic.
    Again you are turning the tables. You deliberately ignore that I posted not Fox but your left media "news".
    After all it was the left media who were after Mr. Trump. Especially after he called them fake news.
    What followed is years of attacks.
    Bill its wasn't Fox but it was left media and the Dem's politicians.
    "The war on media was undermining the public’s confidence in the news they see reported by traditional media.
    The press became willing advocates for government actors (at least the ones they liked). This is the reverse of the role the press is supposed to play.
    The willingness to be spoon-fed is what drove so many big press bloopers. Were there a Collusion Press-Error Hall of Fame, CNN would be the first inductee. There was CNN’s decision in 2017 to run a story, based on one unnamed source, claiming a presidential adviser, Anthony Scaramucci, was under investigation for his ties to a Russian investment fund. CNN had to retract the story, and three of its journalists resigned."

    "In December 2017, CNN announced a scoop for the ages. It claimed it had evidence that Donald Trump Jr. had been offered by advance access to hacked Democratic emails. MSNBC and CBS also claimed to have “confirmed” this evidence that the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks had been colluding. It later came out that the outlets had gotten the date on their evidence wrong. Donald Trump Jr. had been sent an email directing him to look at the WikiLeaks dump — after WikiLeaks had made it public."

    "Also don’t forget BuzzFeed’s epic “news” in January 2019 that President Trump personally directed his longtime attorney Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about the Trump Tower project in Moscow. Politicians seized on the news, and Schiff promised to do what was “necessary” to find out if the president had committed “perjury.” Democratic Rep. Joaquin Castro said that if the allegations were true, Trump “must resign.” The problem? They weren’t. This one was such an invention that special counsel Bob Mueller’s team made a rare statement, denying the BuzzFeed report."

    "There are plenty more. The Washington Post claimed Russians had accessed the US electrical grid through a Vermont utility. Not true. Slate claimed a Trump server had been communicating with Russia. Not true. The Guardian claimed that Paul Manafort had visited Julian Assange in his hideout at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London — three times. If so, Mueller missed it. The press gets furious when Trump talks about “fake news.” But what else would you call this?"

    "Liberal opinion writers were even worse. One of the standout headlines from 2018 came from Jonathan Chait, writing in New York Magazine. It read: “Prump-Tutin: Will Trump Be Meeting with His Counterpart — Or His Handler?” Chait asked: “What if Trump has been a Russian asset from 1987?”"

    "What has defined the media breakdown that started in 2016 was the press’ abandonment of standards in aid of peddling a narrative — rather than reality."

    Some of the left media became very rich thanks to Trump.
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2021
  19. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Lerner, plagiarism is dishonest and distasteful.


    I assume you didn't think this plagiarized article was somehow relevant to supporting your false claim that the left has been saying that Trump was not legitimately elected for the past four plus years.

    Note that according to Mediabiasfactcheck.com the New York Post is the same mediocre accuracy media source as Fox News. Both are Mixed accuracy, a mixture of false, true and incomplete statements.

    BTW, thank you for providing further proof that my assessments asserted in my previous posts that you probably didn't read are accurate. :D
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2021
  20. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    (Emphasis added)

    This is exactly why I no longer engage you.

Share This Page