There is no room for this kind of false equivocation in any honest conversation. You’re parroting sheer --and dangerous– propaganda. Take that back to Russia or wherever pays you 10 cents to post it.
I think the root of this was the SCOTUS stepping into the 00 election to stop the Florida recounting. I definitely heard a lot of stolen election rhetoric from liberals and leftists during shrubs first term - and there’s some gravity to the claim given the events. It’s not the same in Trump’s case though, but the details aren’t what matters in a game with lowest common denominator voters - only rhetoric matters. Rhetoric is what got 1/6 to happen, and it’s what’s where the average Republican to support Trump no matter what.
If we’re talking about 2000, when Supreme Court justices appointed by Bush’s father stepped in and prevented recounts from taking place (which later showed that Bush would have lost) and handed the presidency to Bush; and comparing that to 2021, when the president launched a mob of armed traitors and attacked the capitol, while GOP lawmakers aided them; and saying there’s something similar between them, then all hope for meaningful truth is lost.
“Both sides have accused the other of stealing the election!” is only true insofar as one side has actually stolen an election, after which that fact was grumbled about but then accepted peacefully, and then that same side 20 years later launched a failed coup d’état and whined afterwards about the election being stolen. So it’s a fact, but presenting it as some sort of equivalence is the peak of dishonesty.
(I know that’s not what you’re doing, you’re just explaining the conversation. But that is what the grandparent post was doing, thus my complaint.)
I mean, yeah. I gave you a primary source of a plethora of prominent democrats, including the current president and vice president, claiming election fraud when Trump was first elected.
I’m guessing your overly abundant use of question marks and italics, as well as lack of any sort of substantive retort other than claiming propaganda, is related to your cognitive dissonance. I’m sorry this doesn’t fit your world view.
That’s not what a “primary source” is. Links to websites are not primary sources. This is pretty basic stuff.
No, my abundant use of question marks and italics was to emphasize just how stupid and dishonest what you wrote was. You’re a dishonest propagandist and you are making the world a worse place. Be better than that.
That’s a good policy to have, sugarbuns. Bolster that with a side of honesty and respect and you’d actually be a decent person to talk to, instead of a propaganda spewing clown. Petunia.
Trump and Democrats have done the same thing???
Get the fuck right out of here.
There is no room for this kind of false equivocation in any honest conversation. You’re parroting sheer --and dangerous– propaganda. Take that back to Russia or wherever pays you 10 cents to post it.
I think the root of this was the SCOTUS stepping into the 00 election to stop the Florida recounting. I definitely heard a lot of stolen election rhetoric from liberals and leftists during shrubs first term - and there’s some gravity to the claim given the events. It’s not the same in Trump’s case though, but the details aren’t what matters in a game with lowest common denominator voters - only rhetoric matters. Rhetoric is what got 1/6 to happen, and it’s what’s where the average Republican to support Trump no matter what.
If we’re talking about 2000, when Supreme Court justices appointed by Bush’s father stepped in and prevented recounts from taking place (which later showed that Bush would have lost) and handed the presidency to Bush; and comparing that to 2021, when the president launched a mob of armed traitors and attacked the capitol, while GOP lawmakers aided them; and saying there’s something similar between them, then all hope for meaningful truth is lost.
“Both sides have accused the other of stealing the election!” is only true insofar as one side has actually stolen an election, after which that fact was grumbled about but then accepted peacefully, and then that same side 20 years later launched a failed coup d’état and whined afterwards about the election being stolen. So it’s a fact, but presenting it as some sort of equivalence is the peak of dishonesty.
(I know that’s not what you’re doing, you’re just explaining the conversation. But that is what the grandparent post was doing, thus my complaint.)
Totally in agreement here. You know, it reminds me of another aspect of the Florida recounting. Let me dig …
Here we go!
The Brooks Brothers Riot
I mean, yeah. I gave you a primary source of a plethora of prominent democrats, including the current president and vice president, claiming election fraud when Trump was first elected.
I’m guessing your overly abundant use of question marks and italics, as well as lack of any sort of substantive retort other than claiming propaganda, is related to your cognitive dissonance. I’m sorry this doesn’t fit your world view.
That’s not what a “primary source” is. Links to websites are not primary sources. This is pretty basic stuff.
No, my abundant use of question marks and italics was to emphasize just how stupid and dishonest what you wrote was. You’re a dishonest propagandist and you are making the world a worse place. Be better than that.
Oof, you’re really gonna hate that the definition of a primary source includes videos. Pretty basic stuff.
Might wanna consider applying that “stupid and dishonest propaganda” tagline to your comment. Seethe some more sweetie.
Okay “sweetie.” I’ll take your sincerely regurgitated propaganda to heart, dearie. You have a good night, lovey.
You can definitely be better than this, sweetcheeks.
While you use words of hate, I try to use words of love. Be better honey.
That’s a good policy to have, sugarbuns. Bolster that with a side of honesty and respect and you’d actually be a decent person to talk to, instead of a propaganda spewing clown. Petunia.