It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Is the election actually over? Last ditch effort underway to elect Hillary....

page: 5
8
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 10:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

Sorry to break the bubble but the south is where majority of black voters are located and the states has always been
Red, get over it, Trump won and he will be the next president.


Hillary will never be president.




posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 10:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
The problem is this. A very sinister condition exists now in our country.

A republican tyranny exists that may amount to fascism


They control the congress, now the Supreme Court and now the presidency.


NO ONE WILL INVESTIGATE THEM

Lame Obama went and put Comey in office. So Obama is suspect


In other words its NO ONE TO INVESTIGATE THIS. NO ONE WILL BALANCE THE GOP POWER


WE IS IN TROUBLE


Well, that's what happens when you lose elections as the Democrats have been doing more often than not lately. If you want to blame someone or something, blame them for bad candidates, bad campaigns, and bad policies that have led to a situation where they're basically un-electable in about 30 states.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 10:58 PM
link   
a reply to: diggindirt

As I read Article 2 Section 4, it seems to me that a president can be impeached for a crime committed at any time, not just for crimes committed in office. Not that it matters much. Trump isn't going to be impeached anytime soon.

I agree completely on the Dems. I'm hoping that maybe this election will force them to exercise a little introspection and make an honest attempt to understand why middle America is so overwhelmingly rejecting them and to adjust their policies and attitudes accordingly. Unfortunately, without a change in leadership, I'm not holding my breath.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 11:21 PM
link   
a reply to: DAVID64

Sorry, the Right/Conservatives bitch and whines too, so do I, so does everyone. People's perspective differ.

Just try and get along, for God's sake. You really think the sort of attitude you have right now is going to make things better?
edit on 10/11/2016 by Eilasvaleleyn because: Reasons



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 01:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: vor78
a reply to: diggindirt

As I read Article 2 Section 4, it seems to me that a president can be impeached for a crime committed at any time, not just for crimes committed in office. Not that it matters much. Trump isn't going to be impeached anytime soon.

I agree completely on the Dems. I'm hoping that maybe this election will force them to exercise a little introspection and make an honest attempt to understand why middle America is so overwhelmingly rejecting them and to adjust their policies and attitudes accordingly. Unfortunately, without a change in leadership, I'm not holding my breath.


In the world in which I grew up, I wouldn't doubt at all that you are entirely correct in your statement that he won't be impeached anytime soon. However----never in that world would I have witnessed such a tawdry selection of candidates for the office of president or such a vulgar campaign. We of the '60s only thought we were being radical. In today's world, I'm no longer sure of anything politically.

Were I a betting woman, I would have laid a lot of money on Hillary to win simply because nobody has ever been able to stop her before. I suppose I thought she really was protected by some sort of wicked spell. It was the Clintons that drove me from the Democrat party. Their ideology had nothing to do with the Democrat principles by which I was raised. Slick's lie about "not inhaling" was just one early sign that they didn't believe what they were espousing and their inability to be honest. If one family can be blamed for the demise of the party it would the Clintons.

If they are to be taken seriously hereafter they need to really clean their house, fumigate it, and take a long hard look for folks of integrity to take leadership roles. People trained in public relations won't mend these fences. They are broke and out of power. They are short on credibility and have just found out that there are more voters than there are banksters. Corporate interests can give money to campaigns---but in the end, if the candidate is unelectable, all the money spent on media didn't buy them the election.

Apparently nobody in the party was paying attention to what was happening on the state level. They completely ignored the Republican upset in Kentucky last year. The national party did the exact same thing that the state party of Kentucky did----they encouraged an opponent with no political experience and got their hats handed to them. I'm certainly no prophetess but even I pointed out that danger to several of my local and state Dem friends. They would chuckle and say, "You really think Trump can beat Hillary?"

It wasn't just the presidential race, take a look at a lot of the down-ticket races as well. People who were "outsiders" to the realm of politics won some surprising victories. It seems to me that the people may be beginning to exercise their power to tell the public servants that the people are the boss, not the parties. At least that is my hope.



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 07:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Yes, Michigan has reported, but the CNN graphic
is showing Michigan grey, withholding the numbers
from the total.

I cant imagine why CNN would do that?






No, Michigan hasn't awarded it's electoral votes (allegedly too close to call) but 96% of their votes have been reported in the popular vote total.

ETA: And even if Michigan's reported votes weren't included in the popular vote total, so far, you could roll them in yourself and see: Trump is only ahead by 10,000 votes in Michigan. He is behind overall in the popular vote by 400,000. It wouldn't make much of a difference.

I just have a sense we're being set up.

Yes, I understand this is not the first time the popular vote winner lost the EC. But I don't think it's ever been a margin this big...and they are going to try to use this...I just have this sinking feeling.
edit on 11-11-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
Even if she won the two remaining states that are uncalled (Michigan & New Hampshire) she would still have a total electoral vote of less than 270.


The electoral college is not actually bound by the vote. They can all go to Hillary.



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: underwerks

Nobody on this site is more anti-Trump than me, it stings knowing that the person you voted for won the popular vote and lost the electoral college — and this is twice in 16 years — but no, I could never support this.

Injecting uncertainty into the transfer of power would damage us as a nation, it would be bad for us as a people and the effects would ripple outward from us.

He won by our system and he will take office. If we want to change the election process, that's a discussion for the future.


Bravo, ante. On all points, I can't help but support them.

If only all of us could maintain your magnanimity. I hope that
last thing meant you're cool with something personally uncool.
But I'm just a stupid old tool maker who simply wanted to go
to work in the morning and make something useful out of it.

For the last of your points-- I fully agree that with communication
having advanced in speed far beyond our founding father's ponies
... and with an assumption by an anti-federalist (moi) the several
states not ideologically the voice as was intended by them as
opposed to the citizen's voice.. yeah, let's 86 the college.

Of course if you believe each state should have some
proportionally equal say you are hereby cleared to shoot me.
Better a friend..... and I was just reading up on Lincoln's duel....



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 04:53 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

She Conceded the Election . If she had Any Doubts about the Outcome , she would have Waited before doing that . The Election has been Legally Decided . End of Story .



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: underwerks

She Conceded the Election . If she had Any Doubts about the Outcome , she would have Waited before doing that . The Election has been Legally Decided . End of Story .


Didn't Gore un-concede because of a major vote discrepancy"



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 04:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: underwerks

She Conceded the Election . If she had Any Doubts about the Outcome , she would have Waited before doing that . The Election has been Legally Decided . End of Story .

Actually no. Al Gore took back his concession. Whether a president offers a concession or not doesn't mean anything.

The electoral college hasn't voted yet. It's as simple as that. You can believe what the media tells you about it if you want. I thought the Trump angle was that the media couldn't be trusted though?

Which is it?
edit on 11-11-2016 by underwerks because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: underwerks

She Conceded the Election . If she had Any Doubts about the Outcome , she would have Waited before doing that . The Election has been Legally Decided . End of Story .


Didn't Gore un-concede because of a major vote discrepancy"

There is no discrepancy here. They want the Electoral College to give all the votes to Hillary in states she lost.



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
The problem is this. A very sinister condition exists now in our country.

A republican tyranny exists that may amount to fascism


They control the congress, now the Supreme Court and now the presidency.


NO ONE WILL INVESTIGATE THEM

Lame Obama went and put Comey in office. So Obama is suspect


In other words its NO ONE TO INVESTIGATE THIS. NO ONE WILL BALANCE THE GOP POWER


WE IS IN TROUBLE


Some could say the same was in place when Obama won in 2008 with a majority in the house and senate. But Republicans are wussy little cry babies like the dems appear to be as of late.



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: underwerks

She Conceded the Election . If she had Any Doubts about the Outcome , she would have Waited before doing that . The Election has been Legally Decided . End of Story .


Didn't Gore un-concede because of a major vote discrepancy"



Was Al Gore President in 2000 ? No , he Conceded the Election to G.W. Bush .



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
Even if she won the two remaining states that are uncalled (Michigan & New Hampshire) she would still have a total electoral vote of less than 270.


The electoral college is not actually bound by the vote. They can all go to Hillary.


Hypothetically they could but if they did the outrage would make what is happening now pale in comparison. I personally wouldn't stand for it. The whiny little babies that can't deal with defeat need to grow up and accept our system and the actions of the people.



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 05:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: underwerks

She Conceded the Election . If she had Any Doubts about the Outcome , she would have Waited before doing that . The Election has been Legally Decided . End of Story .

Actually no. Al Gore took back his concession. Whether a president offers a concession or not doesn't mean anything.

The electoral college hasn't voted yet. It's as simple as that. You can believe what the media tells you about it if you want. I thought the Trump angle was that the media couldn't be trusted though?

Which is it?






Concession - The act or an Instance of Conceding (as by Granting something as a Right, Accepting something as True, or Acknowledging Defeat)

You cannot be Plainer than that . Hillary Clinton Willfully gave up Her Claim to being President of the United States . Trying to Rationalize that Fact to Fit into another Narrative is Pointless .



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 05:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: sirlancelot

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
Even if she won the two remaining states that are uncalled (Michigan & New Hampshire) she would still have a total electoral vote of less than 270.


The electoral college is not actually bound by the vote. They can all go to Hillary.


Hypothetically they could but if they did the outrage would make what is happening now pale in comparison. I personally wouldn't stand for it. The whiny little babies that can't deal with defeat need to grow up and accept our system and the actions of the people.

All it would take is some high level pardons. They already have a petition with over 1 million signatures they could wave at everyone and say, "Look we ARE doing the will of the people!"

I'm sure Hillary would cover the $1000 fine for everyone that switched their vote as well.



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: underwerks

She Conceded the Election . If she had Any Doubts about the Outcome , she would have Waited before doing that . The Election has been Legally Decided . End of Story .

Actually no. Al Gore took back his concession. Whether a president offers a concession or not doesn't mean anything.

The electoral college hasn't voted yet. It's as simple as that. You can believe what the media tells you about it if you want. I thought the Trump angle was that the media couldn't be trusted though?

Which is it?






Concession - The act or an Instance of Conceding (as by Granting something as a Right, Accepting something as True, or Acknowledging Defeat)

You cannot be Plainer than that . Hillary Clinton Willfully gave up Her Claim to being President of the United States . Trying to Rationalize that Fact to Fit into another Narrative is Pointless .

There's nothing legally binding in anything you said. We're talking about words and politicians. Why you think Hillary wouldn't go back on her word is beyond me.



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

" Why you think Hillary wouldn't go back on her word is beyond me."

Maybe because as a Candidate for President while being Under Investigation by the F.B.I. , and Knowing the Implications of that If Found to be Guilty of a Crime , She Realized the Best Course of Action told to her by her Legal Council was to Except the Results of the Election and Concede for the Good of Her own Future Political Career , and also for what would be Best for the Country .



posted on Nov, 11 2016 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Good lord, I'll be posting this for days or longer...

REMEMBER EVERYONE: Hillary won the popular vote, during the 2008 Democratic primary, by nearly 300,000 votes.

Who was the nominee? The guy with the most delegates and the LEAST votes: Barack Obama.

Link

Screw these hypocritical Democrat voters. They are fine with the popular vote winner being the LOSER...even when it's Hillary Clinton.

...Or they were in 2008. Now they say they are 'above' that and being cheated.


edit on 11-11-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join