Hillary Clinton in 2002: George W. Bush Was ‘Selected, Not Elected’

In last night's debate, Chris Wallace asked Trump if he would accept the outcome of the election if Hillary won, but never asked Hillary if she would accept the outcome of the election if Trump won. Why?

Well, we already know from history that Hillary doesn't accept election outcomes if they don't go her party's way...

Hillary Clinton in 2002: George W. Bush Was ‘Selected, Not Elected’

 

Hillary wasn't running for president in 2000.

Gore conceded defeat when the legal process ran it's course on a very close election. The question is can Trump behave like an adult and take his loss like a man? Or, does he continue to act like a spoiled child?

 

Whether he concedes or not makes no difference. He is not the one certifying the election

 

Wait, are you telling me that Hillary disputed the results of a Presidential election?

Wait till the media finds out! They will have to declare her unqualified to be President!

 

That election came down to a right-leaning Supreme Court decision that overruled a state's Supreme Court decision.

 

Bush was

but no one was saying the vote was rigged before the people had even voted like Trump is

remember, Bush did not get the majority of the votes, the republican controlled SC picked Bush

.

 

Trump supporters kill me, big difference from disputing the results after the fact and disputing the results before anyone has even voted

and Democrats respected the SC decision even though they disagreed with it

- - - Updated - - -

yep, but it would be nice if Trump would be a good loser rather then a bad looser..... but we are talking about Trump

.

 

The state supreme court wanted to allow more counting. It had already been counted by the Chicago Tribune, R.j. Daley jr, Jesse and Al and everyone one else. At no point was Gore ever ahead in Fl. Perhaps if he had won his home state of Kentucky he would've had enough electoral votes to win. Basically, the Supremes said stop with the counting already. But Gore couldn't get the votes from the people who knew him best - his homies.

 

Jeb's Florida screwing up the election is a flimsy excuse for hardcore Trumpies to try to defend their messiah's being so pissy because he's going to lose.

Of course, a 5-4 Supreme Court vote stopped the recount, and the Republicans on the Court thus made the Bush the President.

Could 2016 come down to a screwed up election in one state? All presidential elections could have, but that never before caused a likely loser to reject the democratic tradition in anticipation of getting his candy arse kicked big time by the American electorate.

 

As I mentioned over on another thread, I believe the question should have been asked in the follow way: "Given what we now know about the collusion that existed between the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and the mainstream media, if you lose this election, will you consider the loss to represent a true and honest reflection of the will of the people?" With the question formulated in that way, the answer "no" doesn't appear to be so unreasonable...

 

had trump not spent the previous weeks preparing for his loss by claiming a rigged election it would not of been such a big deal

.

 

Home state of Tennessee - not Kentucky.

 

1st he has to lose. What do you think he is going to raise an army to fight the election ?

 

I just think he will show the world once again who he is... a bull and a sore loser

 

Do you really care ? What will you do if he wins? Will you accept it ?

 

What's your point?

Bush was selected by a conservative Supreme Court after the election. Al Gore accepted their ruling.

 

He had no choice just as trump wont if he loses and the election is certified by congress

 

The SCOTUS didn't pick either candidate.

The court only said enough is enough in counting the votes numerous times.

Florida counted the votes three times by machine and each time Bush came out ahead.

The Gore camp didn't like the outcome, so they decided to steal the election by having their goons hand count the ballots in only a very Democratic district.

After the SCOTUS decision to stop the stealing of the election by Gore's goon hand counting the ballots, there were seven Florida news papers that counted the ballots and all seven found that Bush won.

So, get over it.

- - - Updated - - -

The SCOTUS didn't pick either candidate.

The court only said enough is enough in counting the votes numerous times.

Florida counted the votes three times by machine and each time Bush came out ahead.

The Gore camp didn't like the outcome, so they decided to steal the election by having their goons hand count the ballots in only a very Democratic district.

After the SCOTUS decision to stop the stealing of the election by Gore's goon hand counting the ballots, there were seven Florida news papers that counted the ballots and all seven found that Bush won.

Stop making crap up!

- - - Updated - - -

The SCOTUS didn't select anybody.

The court only said enough is enough in counting the votes numerous times.

Florida counted the votes three times by machine and each time Bush came out ahead.

The Gore camp didn't like the outcome, so they decided to steal the election by having their goons hand count the ballots in only a very Democratic district.

After the SCOTUS decision to stop the stealing of the election by Gore's goon hand counting the ballots, there were seven Florida news papers that counted the ballots and all seven found that Bush won.

Stop making crap up!

 

I think we all know how he will act at this point

 

What exactly was "right-leaning" about the Supreme Court's decision in that case?

 

Trump hasn't disputed the results. There are no results. Why don't we wait and see how much voter fraud you guys pull.

And if you think Democrats respected the Bush v Gore decision, your memory may not go back that far.

 

You do realize this happened after the votes were cast. No one was whining like a little beotch before the actual votes were placed, lol.

 

The ruling favored the right-wing even while absconding from the "states uber alle" spiel of the Republican Party.

The dissent was along ideological lines and the right-leaning Court favored the outcome that the GOP desired.

 

I love the ridiculous claims of voter fraud from a side of the political spectrum that currently controls BOTH houses of Congress and a majority of state-level positions.

So if there is truly voter fraud, we would be forced to point the finger to the right.

Gore refused to concede while the votes were still being recounted because we're talking about difference in the thousands and within the legal realm of a recount. He conceded once the vote counting was stopped.

 

So you are saying that the SC made the incorrect constitutional and legal decision?

Or....are you just saying that since it didn't go the way you liked, it was wrong?

I had asked what, specifically, was "right-leaning" about the court's decision, and simply because it "favored the right-wing" doesn't mean the decision was incorrect. If the dissent was along ideological lines, isn't it more likely that the left leaning faction of the court was wrong since they seem to have the same sort of view of jurisprudence that you do, that the law and constitution should be ignored to get what you want?

- - - Updated - - -

Heh! Gore conceded after the court stopped the recount and issued it's decision!