DUmmies and THE BIG LIE!

[Mary Ann]

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216957737

barbaraann (8,362 posts)


No, Matthew Pottinger, the 1960 election WAS NOT stolen from Nixon by the Democrats.

It was close, but it was NOT STOLEN and the comparison between that and the ACTUALLY STOLEN 2000 Bush-Gore election is completely wrong.

Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_United_States_presidential_election_in_Illinois

Academic study:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/27550168?seq=1

Wall Street Journal letter:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/election-fraud-stolen-myth-claim-1960-nixon-kennedy-11650494219

Bush v. Gore
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore

If Richard M. Nixon was acting in the best interests of our nation by not contesting the 1960 election, it was the only time in his life he did that.

Hmmm... Why is it A BIG LIE!!! when we think an election was stolen, but not when they do the very same thing???

MagickMuffin (13,338 posts)

4. Indeed, Pottinger didn't acknowledge the Brook Bro riots to Stop the Vote counts



It appears his party turns to violence to try and get their way.

Al Gore won the popular vote. The supreme Court stripped Al Gore of his victory and there wasn't any other legal remedy to pursue.

The activists Judges took care of that.


Pottinger trying his best at revisionist history.


I didn't like the fact he was allowed to filibuster his "testimony" for longer than needed. However, it provided us the opportunity to see how he thinks.

So, it was a "riot" when people tried to stop the open fraud in the vote counting in 2000, but it was "peaceful protest" when they burned cities in 2020?

barbaraann (8,362 posts)

10. Pottinger re the 1960 election: "There were irregularities in that vote according to a lot of the

histories..." Like many Republicans, he insists on trying to delegitimize that election. Regarding the Bush-Gore election, I and many others believe that the Supreme Court ruled incorrectly and corruptly to stop the vote count in Florida AND I also believe that the Republicans probably stole the 2004 election:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_election_voting_controversies

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/former-wh-aide-pottinger-closes-jan-6-testimony-with-thoughts-on-oath-of-office-144562245547

Pottinger strikes me as someone who will still go along with every evil thing in the GOP agenda, using his distorted view of history to justify it. What "histories" can he cite to corroborate his view of the 1960 election?

Not only 2000, but there is another BIG LlE!!! about 2004?

unblock (50,692 posts)

14. I agree that the elections of 1960 and 2000 are not parallel in general

They did have in common that both Nixon and gore were gracious in accepting the outcome of the process and declining to have anything like the kinda of reaction Donnie did.

I agree that the election of 2000 was totally stolen. A later analysis (by, iirc, and consortium of journalists led by the New York Times) showed that gore won Florida (and thus the electoral college) by nearly any combination of recount standards in the contested counties.

The Supreme Court halted the recount before gore could take the lead and then awarded shrub the victory, declaring that the will of the people is best upheld by not looking too closely at how they voted...


So his juxtaposition of those too elections was a bit of spin because they were not equivalent in terms of stolen or not, but they were similar in that no one tried to make a major stink about it the way Donnie did.

I'd agree the technically, there were, or were thought to have been at the time, "irregularities". But a more complete description would include that whatever irregularities there may have been weren't enough to change the outcome and Nixon lost any way you look at it.

Gore wasn't gracious--first, he "took back" his concession, and then, when his selective recounts didn't turn out the way he had hoped, he was the one to run to the courts.

FakeNoose (24,584 posts)

13. Gore walked away because he refused to be Chump

... and I believe that most Democratic candidates would have done the same. No Democrat could ever do what Chump has done because they all realize it would tear the country apart.

Yes it broke my heart too.[/quote
Again, Gore didn't walk away. He accepted the results, but only when he had no recourse. And the DUmmies have never let it go.

[DefiantSix]

barbaraann (8,362 posts)


No, Matthew Pottinger, the 1960 election WAS NOT stolen from Nixon by the Democrats.

It was close, but it was NOT STOLEN and the comparison between that and the ACTUALLY STOLEN 2000 Bush-Gore election is completely wrong...

You keep believing that, DUmbass.

Kennedy and Johnson despised one another. They had completely different personalities, goals, and MORAL CODES. So why did Johnson get the VP nod in Kennedy's 1960 run? (Here's a hint DUmbass: he wasn't on the ticket for the same - impeachment insurance -reason Reggie Love's Li'l Bitch made the purpetually corrupt and incompetent #JoeThePedophile his veep.) Johnson got the VP slot solely and exclusively for his reputation and ability to mickey vote counts in Texas to his advantage.

Face it, ****wits; you stupid bastards haven't been able to win an election without cheating since 1960, and by now the rest of us have seen your threadbare, overworn playbook too many times for us to "trust you" where elections that threaten your power base are concerned.

[CollectivismMustDie]

You keep believing that, DUmbass.

Kennedy and Johnson despised one another. They had completely different personalities, goals, and MORAL CODES. So why did Johnson get the VP nod in Kennedy's 1960 run? (Here's a hint DUmbass: he wasn't on the ticket for the same - impeachment insurance -reason Reggie Love's Li'l Bitch made the purpetually corrupt and incompetent #JoeThePedophile his veep.) Johnson got the VP slot solely and exclusively for his reputation and ability to mickey vote counts in Texas to his advantage.

Face it, ****wits; you stupid bastards haven't been able to win an election without cheating since 1960, and by now the rest of us have seen your threadbare, overworn playbook too many times for us to "trust you" where elections that threaten your power base are concerned.

 

Well said.

[Ralph Wiggum]

Calling Richard Charnin, AKA "Legendary" DUmmy Truth-is-All:

Just one of my favorites:

In the 1968-2012 Presidential elections, the Republicans won the average recorded vote by 48.7-45.8%. The 1968-2012 Recursive National True Vote Model  indicates the Democrats won the True Vote by 49.6-45.0% - a 7.5% margin discrepancy.

In the 1988-2008 elections, the Democrats won the unadjusted state exit poll aggregate by 52-42% - but won the recorded vote by just 48-46%, an 8% margin discrepancy. The state exit poll margin of error was exceeded in 126 of 274 state presidential elections from 1988-2008. The probability of the occurrence is ZERO.

http://richardcharnin.com/

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/01/31/historical-overview-of-election-fraud-analysis/Historical Overview and Analysis of Election Fraud

[Mary Ann]

Calling Richard Charnin, AKA "Legendary" DUmmy Truth-is-All:

Just one of my favorites:

In the 1968-2012 Presidential elections, the Republicans won the average recorded vote by 48.7-45.8%. The 1968-2012 Recursive National True Vote Model  indicates the Democrats won the True Vote by 49.6-45.0% - a 7.5% margin discrepancy.

In the 1988-2008 elections, the Democrats won the unadjusted state exit poll aggregate by 52-42% - but won the recorded vote by just 48-46%, an 8% margin discrepancy. The state exit poll margin of error was exceeded in 126 of 274 state presidential elections from 1988-2008. The probability of the occurrence is ZERO.

http://richardcharnin.com/

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/01/31/historical-overview-of-election-fraud-analysis/Historical Overview and Analysis of Election Fraud

I'm not a numbers person (although I have other redeeming qualities.) Any chance you could translate that into English for me?

[Ralph Wiggum]

I'm not a numbers person (although I have other redeeming qualities.) Any chance you could translate that into English for me?

In a nutshell (appropriate term for TIA, emphasis on NUT), TIA believes that the polls were the gospel and the election results were wrong and more importantly, STOLEN! He runs all sorts of fancy analyses called "Monte Carlo simulations" (which I understand and have done), proving that the Democrat actually won the Presidency in every election since Eisenhower.

We used to ridicule him and his dedicated followers in the mid 2000's at CU, who think everything he types is the holy grail.

[Mary Ann]

In a nutshell (appropriate term for TIA, emphasis on NUT), TIA believes that the polls were the gospel and the election results were wrong and more importantly, STOLEN! He runs all sorts of fancy analyses called "Monte Carlo simulations" (which I understand and have done), proving that the Democrat actually won the Presidency in every election since Eisenhower.

We used to ridicule him and his dedicated followers in the mid 2000's at CU, who think everything he types is the holy grail.

I think I remember. He did all his "proof" on Excel spreadsheets, right?

[USA4ME]

To me, “The Big Lie” is the Trump-Russia hoax.

.

[Carl]

I agree that the election of 2000 was totally stolen. A later analysis (by, iirc, and consortium of journalists led by the New York Times) showed that gore won Florida (and thus the electoral college) by nearly any combination of recount standards in the contested counties.

Wrong asswipe.

https://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/us/examining-vote-overview-study-disputed-florida-ballots-finds-justices-did-not.html