Liberals Need to Accept Election Results

[basquebromance]

Hillary is evil, Obama was misguided but decent. Soros is a terrorist. Not everyone on other side is evil. Some are, some are merely wrong.

 

[basquebromance]

 

[basquebromance]

PUNCH HIM PLEASE, VLADY!

 

[basquebromance]

Hillary blames her loss on "unprecedented events". She lost 2 elections, 3 including recount. Hillary *winning* would be an unprecedented.

Why cant Obama and the left understand, there shouldn't have been anything damaging there to be hacked. Period

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It ain't over until it's over - and it ain't over yet.

CLINTON CAMP POUNCES: BRIEF ELECTORS ON RUSSIA HACKS!​

Electoral College Members Request Intel...

Ex-CIA Heavy: Russia Hacks ‘The Political Equivalent Of 9/11’...

Bipartisan Anger Grows Over Election Interference...

McConnell Backs Probe...

Ryan Gives Bizarre, Noncommittal Response To Meddling...

Trump Trashes CIA’s Findings: ‘I Don’t Believe It’...

Bolton Pushes ‘False Flag’ Conspiracy Theory...

Team Trump Goes On Defense Over Electoral College Lawsuit...

COUNTDOWN: 7 Days Until Electors Officially Cast Votes...

Go Hillary!!!!!

Until someone can show proof of hacking that directly changed election results; it's all hearsay.

I'm skeptical because hacking didn't involve Virginia. If you're going to hack only battleground states...you'd probably start with VA: And as I schooled many a Trump honk when they were trying to sell the rigged election six weeks ago (you member?) why would you not hack the larger states if the penalty for hacking Wyoming and the penalty for hacking California are the same?

Investigate all you want. Its good to have investigations.

Until you have proof...we shouldn't be trying to delegitimize President Elect Trump's victory. See where the evidence takes us.

Are you confused about "hacking"? No one, to my knowledge, is talking about hacking voting machines - we're talking about Russia hacking the DNC and Wikileaks making it public.

Well, then the Russians are not guilty of rigging our election if that is the extent to the hack job. Seriously, according to your logic; if Podesta's kid had gotten on there and printed out his e-mails and mailed them somewhere, they would have been rigging the election too??? If you don't want it uncovered; don't perform the act in the first place.

Certainly it's dirty politics but far from evidence of their changing the election results.

If that is the extent of the CIA's evidence, they should be lampooned for wasting the public's time.

One thing about Trump's appointees so far; no lightweights.

Greg

Hope you're referring to their waistlines.

We have a Fast Food mogul for Labor secretary, a wrestling promoter for the head of the SBA and a HUD secretary he--Trump-- once said had the temerpment of a child molester.

Care to bring up the things Obama said about Hillary when he was running against her?

 

[Witchit]

The world is laughing at our democrats.....

No, they are laughing at the people who voted for Trump. Laughing and scared that Americans can be so stupid.

Get thee to thine safe place!! The Republican voters WANT JOBS!!! See your disconnect??

Greg

Yes! Just like in 2010, when teapers took congress after they ran on jobs! And then they spent every moment since then trying to repeal Obamacare, and they didn't do shit for jobs. Pretty sure we can expect the same from Trump. I bet all those months Obama produced more jobs is going to end.

 

[owebo]

The world is laughing at our democrats.....

No, they are laughing at the people who voted for Trump. Laughing and scared that Americans can be so stupid.

Get thee to thine safe place!! The Republican voters WANT JOBS!!! See your disconnect??

Greg

Yes! Just like in 2010, when teapers took congress after they ran on jobs! And then they spent every moment since then trying to repeal Obamacare, and they didn't do shit for jobs. Pretty sure we can expect the same from Trump. I bet all those months Obama produced more jobs is going to end.

Burger flippers became a career under Obama, and they are worried....l

 

[candycorn]

Until someone can show proof of hacking that directly changed election results; it's all hearsay.

I'm skeptical because hacking didn't involve Virginia. If you're going to hack only battleground states...you'd probably start with VA: And as I schooled many a Trump honk when they were trying to sell the rigged election six weeks ago (you member?) why would you not hack the larger states if the penalty for hacking Wyoming and the penalty for hacking California are the same?

Investigate all you want. Its good to have investigations.

Until you have proof...we shouldn't be trying to delegitimize President Elect Trump's victory. See where the evidence takes us.

Are you confused about "hacking"? No one, to my knowledge, is talking about hacking voting machines - we're talking about Russia hacking the DNC and Wikileaks making it public.

Well, then the Russians are not guilty of rigging our election if that is the extent to the hack job. Seriously, according to your logic; if Podesta's kid had gotten on there and printed out his e-mails and mailed them somewhere, they would have been rigging the election too??? If you don't want it uncovered; don't perform the act in the first place.

Certainly it's dirty politics but far from evidence of their changing the election results.

If that is the extent of the CIA's evidence, they should be lampooned for wasting the public's time.

One thing about Trump's appointees so far; no lightweights.

Greg

Hope you're referring to their waistlines.

We have a Fast Food mogul for Labor secretary, a wrestling promoter for the head of the SBA and a HUD secretary he--Trump-- once said had the temerpment of a child molester.

Care to bring up the things Obama said about Hillary when he was running against her?

I don't know what you're talking about. He appointed her as Secretary of State. Her fellow Senators approved her 94-2. She was more than qualified for any position in the government and is still head and shoulders above the current POTUS-elect. Being a disappointing campaigner is a costly disability.

 

[candycorn]

Until someone can show proof of hacking that directly changed election results; it's all hearsay.

I'm skeptical because hacking didn't involve Virginia. If you're going to hack only battleground states...you'd probably start with VA: And as I schooled many a Trump honk when they were trying to sell the rigged election six weeks ago (you member?) why would you not hack the larger states if the penalty for hacking Wyoming and the penalty for hacking California are the same?

Investigate all you want. Its good to have investigations.

Until you have proof...we shouldn't be trying to delegitimize President Elect Trump's victory. See where the evidence takes us.

Are you confused about "hacking"? No one, to my knowledge, is talking about hacking voting machines - we're talking about Russia hacking the DNC and Wikileaks making it public.

Well, then the Russians are not guilty of rigging our election if that is the extent to the hack job. Seriously, according to your logic; if Podesta's kid had gotten on there and printed out his e-mails and mailed them somewhere, they would have been rigging the election too??? If you don't want it uncovered; don't perform the act in the first place.

Certainly it's dirty politics but far from evidence of their changing the election results.

If that is the extent of the CIA's evidence, they should be lampooned for wasting the public's time.

One thing about Trump's appointees so far; no lightweights.

Greg

Hope you're referring to their waistlines.

We have a Fast Food mogul for Labor secretary, a wrestling promoter for the head of the SBA and a HUD secretary he--Trump-- once said had the temerpment of a child molester.

From what I've read on each they seem quite competent and successful. It will be fascinating watching them adjust to actual Government. I'm expecting a great deal from them. Obviously they will fall short.

Greg

Its a different skillset. As a manager of a private sector operation, you make decisions and hire a staff to execute them. The ramifications of those decisions results in winners and losers. If you're effective, those in your organization are the winner and those outside are the losers. As a public sector superintendent, you make decisions as well. The problem is that there is nobody outside of your organization; your competition are the insurmountable opponents of not enough time and not enough resources. Effectiveness is usually determined by the how well the whole was positively affected; not a small percentage of the whole to which all of the appointees belong.

I'm skeptical that many of them give a flying fuck about those who will be affected by their departments; much less have the skillset/mindset that is necessary for seamless transition from the private sector to the public.

I will wait to be astounded.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Are you confused about "hacking"? No one, to my knowledge, is talking about hacking voting machines - we're talking about Russia hacking the DNC and Wikileaks making it public.

Well, then the Russians are not guilty of rigging our election if that is the extent to the hack job. Seriously, according to your logic; if Podesta's kid had gotten on there and printed out his e-mails and mailed them somewhere, they would have been rigging the election too??? If you don't want it uncovered; don't perform the act in the first place.

Certainly it's dirty politics but far from evidence of their changing the election results.

If that is the extent of the CIA's evidence, they should be lampooned for wasting the public's time.

One thing about Trump's appointees so far; no lightweights.

Greg

Hope you're referring to their waistlines.

We have a Fast Food mogul for Labor secretary, a wrestling promoter for the head of the SBA and a HUD secretary he--Trump-- once said had the temerpment of a child molester.

Care to bring up the things Obama said about Hillary when he was running against her?

I don't know what you're talking about. He appointed her as Secretary of State. Her fellow Senators approved her 94-2. She was more than qualified for any position in the government and is still head and shoulders above the current POTUS-elect. Being a disappointing campaigner is a costly disability.

Oh please, by all means, let me remind you of what he said about her:

 

[candycorn]

Well, then the Russians are not guilty of rigging our election if that is the extent to the hack job. Seriously, according to your logic; if Podesta's kid had gotten on there and printed out his e-mails and mailed them somewhere, they would have been rigging the election too??? If you don't want it uncovered; don't perform the act in the first place.

Certainly it's dirty politics but far from evidence of their changing the election results.

If that is the extent of the CIA's evidence, they should be lampooned for wasting the public's time.

One thing about Trump's appointees so far; no lightweights.

Greg

Hope you're referring to their waistlines.

We have a Fast Food mogul for Labor secretary, a wrestling promoter for the head of the SBA and a HUD secretary he--Trump-- once said had the temerpment of a child molester.

Care to bring up the things Obama said about Hillary when he was running against her?

I don't know what you're talking about. He appointed her as Secretary of State. Her fellow Senators approved her 94-2. She was more than qualified for any position in the government and is still head and shoulders above the current POTUS-elect. Being a disappointing campaigner is a costly disability.

Oh please, by all means, let me remind you of what he said about her:

Would be nice if you could quote the President entirely...but you can't; of course.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The world is laughing at our democrats.....

No, they are laughing at the people who voted for Trump. Laughing and scared that Americans can be so stupid.

Get thee to thine safe place!! The Republican voters WANT JOBS!!! See your disconnect??

Greg

Yes! Just like in 2010, when teapers took congress after they ran on jobs! And then they spent every moment since then trying to repeal Obamacare, and they didn't do shit for jobs. Pretty sure we can expect the same from Trump. I bet all those months Obama produced more jobs is going to end.

The difference between DumBama and Trump is Trump actually created jobs. He did the hiring--he did the firing. He understands the company point of view. DumBama just understands all companies and corporations are evil. DumBama is the most anti-business President we've had in our lifetime. He's done nothing to make it better or easier on businesses, he's made it harder. And yet when business prevails, you want to give him the credit for it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

One thing about Trump's appointees so far; no lightweights.

Greg

Hope you're referring to their waistlines.

We have a Fast Food mogul for Labor secretary, a wrestling promoter for the head of the SBA and a HUD secretary he--Trump-- once said had the temerpment of a child molester.

Care to bring up the things Obama said about Hillary when he was running against her?

I don't know what you're talking about. He appointed her as Secretary of State. Her fellow Senators approved her 94-2. She was more than qualified for any position in the government and is still head and shoulders above the current POTUS-elect. Being a disappointing campaigner is a costly disability.

Oh please, by all means, let me remind you of what he said about her:

Would be nice if you could quote the President entirely...but you can't; of course.

I gave you a video with his own words. I understand the man is a compulsive liar, but even you can't deny what he said.

 

[candycorn]

Hope you're referring to their waistlines.

We have a Fast Food mogul for Labor secretary, a wrestling promoter for the head of the SBA and a HUD secretary he--Trump-- once said had the temerpment of a child molester.

Care to bring up the things Obama said about Hillary when he was running against her?

I don't know what you're talking about. He appointed her as Secretary of State. Her fellow Senators approved her 94-2. She was more than qualified for any position in the government and is still head and shoulders above the current POTUS-elect. Being a disappointing campaigner is a costly disability.

Oh please, by all means, let me remind you of what he said about her:

Would be nice if you could quote the President entirely...but you can't; of course.

I gave you a video with his own words. I understand the man is a compulsive liar, but even you can't deny what he said.

So you can't quote him.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Care to bring up the things Obama said about Hillary when he was running against her?

I don't know what you're talking about. He appointed her as Secretary of State. Her fellow Senators approved her 94-2. She was more than qualified for any position in the government and is still head and shoulders above the current POTUS-elect. Being a disappointing campaigner is a costly disability.

Oh please, by all means, let me remind you of what he said about her:

Would be nice if you could quote the President entirely...but you can't; of course.

I gave you a video with his own words. I understand the man is a compulsive liar, but even you can't deny what he said.

So you can't quote him.

You want me to put everything he said on this video into words? Doesn't your computer not handle videos or something? If you want quotes, play the video. They are all his quotes.

 

[basquebromance]

 

[easyt65]

'Liberals Need To Accept The Election Results'

'N E V E R!'

 

[NYcarbineer]

'Liberals Need To Accept Election Results'

When did you accept the election of Obama?

 

[Meathead]

'Liberals Need To Accept Election Results'

When did you accept the election of Obama?

Early November 2008 and again 2012. I don't recall the fevered pitch of whining ceaseless since November 8, 2016 ever in American politics.

I suspect it was shock, butthurt as well as a proclivity to whining by liberals.

 

[easyt65]

When did you accept the election of Obama?

The next day after the election.

Denying reality does not change reality, nor does it help the country.

As 'your' candidate said, 'to challenge the election results undermines the very pillars on which our Democracy is built'.

What we are watching now is that Hillary would rather win at ANY cost, even if that means ripping the country apart, and we are seeing the truth about liberals - the complete LACK of tolerance.

Barak Obama, 2008:
"Hillary Clinton will do and say anything to get elected and will change nothing."