Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So Gore didn't have to answer the question.

 Frazzled wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Because he's not running to win.

As he said he will not accept a loss and object.

Which the media and HRC jumped on within seconds, despite Gore.

What about Gore? Because the re-count was automatic under Florida law. And he conceded after the BvG decision.

 Frazzled wrote:
So Gore didn't have to answer the question.

It might have been asked of him somewhere along the line (not like I've memorized every question asked of every candidates ever), but before Bush v. Gore went to SCOTUS it was not what we might call a "high profile" question.

There are entire teams of hired hands who's jobs are to formulate all the possible questions their candidate could be asked so that the candidate can practice their answer. By the press, by random strangers, at debates. Hell normal people do the same process every time they prepare themselves for a job interview, and the run for POTUS is kind of just a super giant super public job interview XD Trump has obviously not developed that skill set at all, but that seems to be part of his appeal. People like that he hasn't prepared his responses.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Because he's not running to win.

As he said he will not accept a loss and object.

Which the media and HRC jumped on within seconds, despite Gore.

What about Gore? Because the re-count was automatic under Florida law. And he conceded after the BvG decision.

He conceded after taking it all the way to the Supreme Court you mean? You know there's no other legal avenue beyond that right?

 Frazzled wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Because he's not running to win.

As he said he will not accept a loss and object.

Which the media and HRC jumped on within seconds, despite Gore.

What about Gore? Because the re-count was automatic under Florida law. And he conceded after the BvG decision.

He conceded after taking it all the way to the Supreme Court you mean? You know there's no other legal avenue beyond that right?

Perhaps you should educate yourself on how it actually happend.

Bush appealed to the supreme court

Heres a condensed version for those who went through the Texas Public Education system

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-al-gore-recount-fact-check_us_580842a7e4b0dd54ce37f853

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The strange thing is that Trump called have won this election if he'd kept his mouth shut on building walls with Mexico and the horrendous comments against women, and the needless and stupid twitter fights...

He could have taken a reasoned and measured approach to immigration. He could have championed the common man against the establishment candidate that is Clinton (I'm well aware of Trump's background)

And his pragmatic approach to foreign policy is exactly what America needs right now at this time in history after 15 years of defeat and disaster abroad.

If he had done these things, this contest would have been neck and neck...

But that's how Trump won the Republican nomination. What, was he supposed to just reset everything after the primaries like shaking an Etch-A-Sketch?

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
, was he supposed to just reset everything after the primaries like shaking an Etch-A-Sketch?

Clearly this is the mistake we made with Russia

We didn't need a reset button. We needed to clear the etch-a-sketch

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The strange thing is that Trump called have won this election if he'd kept his mouth shut on building walls with Mexico and the horrendous comments against women, and the needless and stupid twitter fights...

He could have taken a reasoned and measured approach to immigration. He could have championed the common man against the establishment candidate that is Clinton (I'm well aware of Trump's background)

And his pragmatic approach to foreign policy is exactly what America needs right now at this time in history after 15 years of defeat and disaster abroad.

If he had done these things, this contest would have been neck and neck...

But that's how Trump won the Republican nomination. What, was he supposed to just reset everything after the primaries like shaking an Etch-A-Sketch?

He'll pivot! Any day now! It'll happen! You'll see!

There's a difference between raising a question about the outcome of an election, and respecting an outcome once it was final.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Because he's not running to win.

As he said he will not accept a loss and object.

Which the media and HRC jumped on within seconds, despite Gore.

What about Gore? Because the re-count was automatic under Florida law. And he conceded after the BvG decision.

He conceded after taking it all the way to the Supreme Court you mean? You know there's no other legal avenue beyond that right?

Perhaps you should educate yourself on how it actually happend.

Bush appealed to the supreme court

Heres a condensed version for those who went through the Texas Public Education system

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-al-gore-recount-fact-check_us_580842a7e4b0dd54ce37f853

Spoiler:

1. On election night, several television networks called Florida for George W. Bush, clinching the electoral college — although Gore would end up winning about 500,000 more votes. Gore called Bush to concede.

2. Then the networks uncalled Florida — and Gore unconceded, realizing that he was ahead in the popular vote and if he ended up winning Florida he would have won the election. The election was literally too close to call.

3. A legally mandated recount began.

4. Bush (not Gore) sued to stop recounts in some counties.

5. Gore sued to extend deadlines for recounts.

6. The Florida Supreme Court ordered a more extensive recount. Bush (not Gore) appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

7. The U.S. Supreme Court stopped the recount.

8. Gore conceded.

Oooh, and we got my favorite picture from any election!




And all of the newscasters saying "dangling" over and over. Dangle. hehe.

That's not nice to break Frazzled's own Forged Narrative. You should let him live in his Right Wing Dream World, you meanies.

 Sarouan wrote:
That's not nice to break Frazzled's own Forged Narrative. You should let him live in his Right Wing Dream World, you meanies.

We're trying to help him. If he keeps this up, he's going to end up in one of Obama's FEMA camps and his poor dogs will be turned into a coat for Cruella de Clinton.

Thats ok. Going to take a break from this for a bit. I just realized I am being castigated by both sides on different forums so taking a step away .

Whenever I start to think that the OT is getting bad I just go look at the Yahoo comments and realize we aren't that bad at all, really.

 Ahtman wrote:
Whenever I start to think that the OT is getting bad I just go look at the Yahoo comments and realize we aren't that bad at all, really.

Thats one way to keep your spirits high

Its not just yahoo, most other places discussing it are cesspools

I'm pretty sure that study definitely proved that the more people involved in a discussion the stupider it becomes.

Frazzled wrote:Thats ok. Going to take a break from this for a bit. I just realized I am being castigated by both sides on different forums so taking a step away .

I think I'll skip out on this thread from here on out, too. This close to the "big day", all anybody can really do at this point is go vote, and wait and see.


But whoever gets the Oval Office (or should I say "Oral Orifice"), we're going to be in for one hell of a wild ride.

WrentheFaceless wrote:Its not just yahoo, most other places discussing it are cesspools

I find Dakka OT to be relatively civilized.

And there are far worse places than Yahoo and YouTube. Like 4chan. But that's just SOP for the 'chans.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Heres a condensed version for those who went through the Texas Public Education system

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-al-gore-recount-fact-check_us_580842a7e4b0dd54ce37f853

That condensed list leaves out a lot of important information. I suggest you go to Wikipedia instead of Huffpo if you want to know what happened with the whole Florida recount disaster.

 Frazzled wrote:

infinite_array wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Because he's not running to win.

As he said he will not accept a loss and object.

Which the media and HRC jumped on within seconds, despite Gore.

You're not seriously comparing the two, are you?

They're worlds apart. If Trump manages to get with 5-10 electoral votes of Clinton, and then there's some dodgy vote counting, then you'd have a case.

But this is just stupid.

You're missing my point. Its almost like they were waiting for him to say it and intentionally had it as a question. Its almost like there's a list out there where everyone privately goes and discusses things, almost a journalist list. You could even abbreviate it and call it Journolist. Oh wait. . .

When asked if he would accept the result Trump could simply have said, "Of course I will, it's the American way." It's not anyone else's fault if Trump is liable to go completely hatstand at the slightest opportunity.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sarouan wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

Fact Checking can't overcome willful ignorance though.

On the way home from work yesterday morning the radio had an interview with a Republican congress critter about the debate. He repeated one of Trump's claims and the reporter told him "actually, that claim has been fact checked a number of times and is actually wrong". The Republican flat out told him "I don't really care much about fact checking, I care more about how something feels, and this feels true".

The quote is basically the old fight "reason vs instinct". Some people trust their feelings more than their reason - and the opposite is also true. It's basically a question of personnality and how you apprehend the world through yourself.

Since feelings are more and more glorified through a lot of different medias, it's not surprising people think it's more important than reasoning. Especially when "Alpha Male" behavior is seen as being a mark of a true, strong leadership. Yeah, right. Totally to the right, indeed.

This is a good point, however what explains the fact that the right wing sites (according to the Buzzfeed analysis) tell twice as many lies as the left wing sites, and also are more liable simple to invent stuff out of nowhere.

If we admit that humans are prone to cognitive dissonance, emotional thinking and so on, surely left wing people would be just as prone to this as right wing people.

The difference, in my view, is that the US right wing has spent the past 30 years telling people that climate change is a left-wing conspiracy, that voter fraud is widespread, that tax cuts for the rich and trickle down economics will raise up the poor... and other things that are completely at odds with pragmatic facts.

You can't go on believing these things for ever in the face of the evidence, so if you are desperate to believe in them, you simply invent evidence. These are all things that the Republicans have built into the identity of their party and therefore tend to attract people with somewhat delusional attitudes. It could as easily have been left-wing policy to assert that life on Mars is controlling the economy, or anarchism as the best form of government, or whatever, and then the left would have attracted more loonies that it has. (There are plenty of loonies on the left too.) But actually the left wing programme of the past 30 years has been in opposition to the right wing programme and therefore is more rooted in actual reality.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

This is a good point, however what explains the fact that the right wing sites (according to the Buzzfeed analysis) tell twice as many lies as the left wing sites, and also are more liable simple to invent stuff out of nowhere.

Hm, I don't know. People go more and more on the extremes, I feel. They don't try to compromise anymore. They actually see that as a proof of weakness.

It's true I would be fine with saying Right Wing people are horrible and full of lies, but actually I don't think that's true. A lot of people are angry. When you are angry, you aren't prone to reason. You listen to your feelings first.

The danger is when other cynical people use that anger for their own, selfish purpose. I think that's what's happening with Trump. Clinton also uses that anger, but the anger that others people are feeling towards Trump and what he represents to them.

In the end, we let our feelings talk too much, when we really should think more about the true roots behind all these angry words. And it's not immigration, muslims or even women. Those are just a smoke screen.


That doesn't keep me from thinking there are also a lot of people living in their own delusions because it's convenient for them.

 Kilkrazy wrote:


This is a good point, however what explains the fact that the right wing sites (according to the Buzzfeed analysis) tell twice as many lies as the left wing sites, and also are more liable simple to invent stuff out of nowhere.

If we admit that humans are prone to cognitive dissonance, emotional thinking and so on, surely left wing people would be just as prone to this as right wing people.

The difference, in my view, is that the US right wing has spent the past 30 years telling people that climate change is a left-wing conspiracy, that voter fraud is widespread, that tax cuts for the rich and trickle down economics will raise up the poor... and other things that are completely at odds with pragmatic facts.

You can't go on believing these things for ever in the face of the evidence, so if you are desperate to believe in them, you simply invent evidence. These are all things that the Republicans have built into the identity of their party and therefore tend to attract people with somewhat delusional attitudes. It could as easily have been left-wing policy to assert that life on Mars is controlling the economy, or anarchism as the best form of government, or whatever, and then the left would have attracted more loonies that it has. (There are plenty of loonies on the left too.) But actually the left wing programme of the past 30 years has been in opposition to the right wing programme and therefore is more rooted in actual reality.

I saw that article. It was a review of a number of "main stream" media sites, and nutball partisan sites. When you start getting to public forums, there is no end of the BS you'll find on either side of the spectrum.

I actually found it interesting that the left wing sites had such a high concentration of "nonfactual content." Guess the lefties love to banter randomly or something XD

 Sarouan wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

This is a good point, however what explains the fact that the right wing sites (according to the Buzzfeed analysis) tell twice as many lies as the left wing sites, and also are more liable simple to invent stuff out of nowhere.

Hm, I don't know. People go more and more on the extremes, I feel. They don't try to compromise anymore. They actually see that as a proof of weakness.

It's true I would be fine with saying Right Wing people are horrible and full of lies, but actually I don't think that's true. A lot of people are angry. When you are angry, you aren't prone to reason. You listen to your feelings first.

The danger is when other cynical people use that anger for their own, selfish purpose. I think that's what's happening with Trump. Clinton also uses that anger, but the anger that others people are feeling towards Trump and what he represents to them.

In the end, we let our feelings talk too much, when we really should think more about the true roots behind all these angry words. And it's not immigration, muslims or even women. Those are just a smoke screen.


That doesn't keep me from thinking there are also a lot of people living in their own delusions because it's convenient for them.

You mention anger, but I think there is a lot of fear, as well. Politicians do a great job of scaring the populace to distract them from real problems, and to scare the people into letting the politicians get away with stuff they wouldn't otherwise be able to. The McCarthy era is the textbook example, and today we have the "ban the Muslims" and "build a wall to stop the evil Mexicans".. Shortly after 9/11 it was "we must do this or the terrorists win". And for many years we've had "gay marriage will ruin society/morals/families/etc.".

In a campaign already rocked by scandal, we finally have it: the one to top them all.

 Ouze wrote:
In a campaign already rocked by scandal, we finally have it: the one to top them all.

Really, the only thing that surprises me about the whole thing is.... why the feth would they go to In-n-Out???

The heart wants what the heart wants.

Unless something has dramatically changed there in the last 15 years, In n Out is fething delicious.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Really, the only thing that surprises me about the whole thing is.... why the feth would they go to In-n-Out???

To show everyone they're just like us.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
In a campaign already rocked by scandal, we finally have it: the one to top them all.

Really, the only thing that surprises me about the whole thing is.... why the feth would they go to In-n-Out???

Both of these are valid:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Really, the only thing that surprises me about the whole thing is.... why the feth would they go to In-n-Out???

To show everyone they're just like us.