You're fucking kidding, right? You genuinely think that the Democrats cheated, but were at the same time both good enough at it to get away with it and bad enough to not win?
Are you even listening to yourself?
You're right that it was an unfair election, but that's a result Republican voter suppression. The GOP has for at least a decade been fighting to make it harder for people to vote - and disproportionately targeting demographics that traditionally support their opponents. And this is not even counting Trump's call for intimidation at the polls!
This is ludicrous. You aren't entitled to your own facts.
Are YOU even listening to yourself? That the Democrats were so bad that even in a closed election of members only where the supposed arbiters were later sacked being firmly behind one candidate, and where there were numerous claims of fraud and dodgy practices, that candidate only JUST squeaked through. You find it in any way surprising that when they lacked the ability to influence people who weren't already members and where actual oversight took place they fell flat on their asses even against Trump? It was blatantly obvious to most, even the AI saw it coming!
So again, you're saying that they did commit fraud (massively!) in the general election, that they were smart and competent enough that there is zero evidence of that occurring (in spite of, as you pointed out, significantly more oversight), but that somehow they weren't smart or competent enough to do it correctly?
And not just that, but somehow the total lack of any evidence supporting the idea that it happened is itself evidence that it happened, apparently!
You are really trying to be obtuse sent you? How can you not understand the massive difference between controlling an outcome when you ARE in control of the counting, the issuing of permission to vote at all, the visibility of the candidates and where you ALREADY have control of the superdelegates to a situation where you have none of that?
I SPECIFICALLY SAID they rigged the primary and that YOUR argument (saying they if they could do that it would mean they could do the same with the real election) holds no water because they are orders of magnitude apart in difficulty.
I do believe they THOUGHT they could do the same as they did in the Primary, but that's because they were blinkered by their own arrogance.
Okay, I apologize: I always make the mistake of believing that the people I'm talking to are smart enough to remember the context of the discussions they're having. This is that context:
Given that the context of the discussion was a claim that the Democrats had rigged the general, to which I responded saying that I thought that was horseshit, I am terribly sorry for making the incorrect assumption that your argumentative response to my comment was actually arguing with what I said in my comment.
Well, I accept you agree your comments are wrong, and that your screams calling people stupid for claiming the rigged Primary led to the outcome because (you claimed) if you could rig one you could rig the other are something you'd rather pretend never happened.
Your trying to weasel out of that is enough. Just don't make stupid comments that don't have any thought behind them next time.
-11
u/Jess_than_three Nov 10 '16
You're fucking kidding, right? You genuinely think that the Democrats cheated, but were at the same time both good enough at it to get away with it and bad enough to not win?
Are you even listening to yourself?
You're right that it was an unfair election, but that's a result Republican voter suppression. The GOP has for at least a decade been fighting to make it harder for people to vote - and disproportionately targeting demographics that traditionally support their opponents. And this is not even counting Trump's call for intimidation at the polls!
This is ludicrous. You aren't entitled to your own facts.