Recounters denied access to actual ballots - so what is there to hide?

[Stacyrect]

I really can't believe your feigned ignorance of alt-right. I mean, seriously, spare me - go work your little games on someone who is going to fall for that bullshit.

Blah blah blah - your usual summary and conclusion of a complicated situation, dismissing the salient points and then criticizing them out of hand. It's adorable that you claim above not to know alt-right and previous iterations - you do exactly what they do.

Are you surprised, I first heard of it like 3 weeks ago. No one in these forums did either as their is no mention of the brand 'alt right' media prior to Trumps victory.

I feel like it's a tragic comedy that liberal media is giving white supremacists/alt right media groups a legitimate brand and national platform to scape goat Clintons failures for not winning the election.

[Annoying]

Are you surprised, I first heard of it like 3 weeks ago. No one in these forums did either as their is no mention of the brand 'alt right' media prior to Trumps victory.

I feel like it's a tragic comedy that liberal media is giving white supremacists/alt right media groups a legitimate brand and national platform to scape goat Clintons failures for not winning the election.

What? No.

/r/altright
a community for 6 years.

[Noogai131]

The big problem is that IF there was a recount and it turns out that Trump won because of cheating and Clinton actually should be president, Trump and his cult would not accept it. They'd claim he did win but jews in Area 51 are faking the cheat to make it look like he didn't win. If you think angry democrats are violent now, just wait for the brainwashed trumpets to go bananas.

Literally not an argument. "Red team sucks" coming out of the mouth of a blue team supporter.

- - - Updated - - -

What? No.

/r/altright
a community for 6 years.

A reddit community. A. REDDIT. COMMUNITY. You think that I would know what /r/SRS is until somebody mentions it to me? Your argument right now is "This thing existed as a community on a website for a long time, therefore you're either lying or retarded".

I only found out about the alt-right 6 months ago, and that was when this campaign thing got into full swing and the MSM went nuts about "alt-right nazi frogs".

[Deleted]

Literally not an argument. "Red team sucks" coming out of the mouth of a blue team supporter.

- - - Updated - - -



A reddit community. A. REDDIT. COMMUNITY. You think that I would know what /r/SRS is until somebody mentions it to me? Your argument right now is "This thing existed as a community on a website for a long time, therefore you're either lying or retarded".

I only found out about the alt-right 6 months ago, and that was when this campaign thing got into full swing and the MSM went nuts about "alt-right nazi frogs".

Not an argument, just what I believe will happen as a non american based on how Trump spreads conspiracies that his suporters believe.

[Stacyrect]

What? No.

/r/altright
a community for 6 years.

I didn't write what I meant to say but fair enough, ok there has been an alt-right community on reddit. I guess I'm not privvy to the ongoings of white supremecists and 'alt right' people.

[Noogai131]

I didn't write what I meant to say but fair enough, ok there has been an alt-right community on reddit. I guess I'm not privvy to the ongoings of white supremecists and 'alt right' people.

Careful man, saying you're not a white supremacist apparently makes you a white supremacist these days.

[Stacyrect]

Not an argument, just what I believe will happen as a non american based on how Trump spreads conspiracies that his suporters believe.

What conspiracies?

- - - Updated - - -

Careful man, saying you're not a white supremacist apparently makes you a white supremacist these days.

Apparently so

[Annoying]

Literally not an argument. "Red team sucks" coming out of the mouth of a blue team supporter.

- - - Updated - - -



A reddit community. A. REDDIT. COMMUNITY. You think that I would know what /r/SRS is until somebody mentions it to me? Your argument right now is "This thing existed as a community on a website for a long time, therefore you're either lying or retarded".

I only found out about the alt-right 6 months ago, and that was when this campaign thing got into full swing and the MSM went nuts about "alt-right nazi frogs".

No. My argument was a response to two people saying "it's only existed as a term for like 6 months", and "no mention of the brand 'alt right' media prior to Trumps victory." But I sure do love when people assume I'm making a statement other than showing that it has existed for quite some time.

I didn't write what I meant to say but fair enough, ok there has been an alt-right community on reddit. I guess I'm not privvy to the ongoings of white supremecists and 'alt right' people.

Oh for sure, just showing that it certainly has been around. Certainly not in MSM, but it was around. Stems from a speech in Nov 2008 for reference.

[Acidbaron]

Hasn't the trump crowd been feared into thinking that anything negatively reported about him in the media is a falsehood and a personal attack with no context?

If that's true there really is no surprise against this hostile rejection since they have been conditioned to see anything remotely negative as an attack. What is a good way to create division may i add. Well americans optimism have survived Bush i'm sure it will survive another crazy out of touch president.

[Noogai131]

Hasn't the trump crowd been feared into thinking that anything negatively reported about him in the media is a falsehood and a personal attack with no context?

Et tu, brutus? We can have this argument all day about this one statement. Wasn't the left whipped up into a frenzy about a "Racist Misogynist Sexist Islamophobe Child Abusing Dictator"? Wasn't basically EVERY mainstream media outlet constantly taking apart literally every single thing he said and did, whilst showing almost none of that towards Hilary?

Or, is it alright when it happens to the side you don't agree with, and not when it happens to you? One rule for me, another for thee?

I consider myself staunchly in the middle, waiting to see what happens with any of this currently.

[Stacyrect]

No. My argument was a response to two people saying "it's only existed as a term for like 6 months", and "no mention of the brand 'alt right' media prior to Trumps victory." But I sure do love when people assume I'm making a statement other than showing that it has existed for quite some time.

Oh for sure, just showing that it certainly has been around. Certainly not in MSM, but it was around. Stems from a speech in Nov 2008 for reference.

I just find it hard to believe the rhetoric that these people are suddenly responsible for so much political mayhem when I wasn't even aware of their existence till a few weeks ago.

[Acidbaron]

Et tu, brutus? We can have this argument all day about this one statement. Wasn't the left whipped up into a frenzy about a "Racist Misogynist Sexist Islamophobe Child Abusing Dictator"? Wasn't basically EVERY mainstream media outlet constantly taking apart literally every single thing he said and did, whilst showing almost none of that towards Hilary?

Or, is it alright when it happens to the side you don't agree with, and not when it happens to you? One rule for me, another for thee?

I consider myself staunchly in the middle, waiting to see what happens with any of this currently.

To label all the Press as malicious is what took place, what the press does is report true there's a bias there, always is but to label all Press that is negative that is malicious. Even yourself just sort of proved my point by indicating the press that was negative was the "left side". Creating a division, an us vs them game.

Trump did receive more then Clinton but that has nothing to do with who the media set their arrows on, Clinton simply didn't make merely as many outrageous statements as Trump did, what was basically a pillar in his campaign strategy. If you put yourself in the middle of a media storm every time it is rather dishonest to come back and claim it is just "The press gunning for you". Especially when asking for explanation on his statements and they were issued often he often added to the outrage rather then to try to dismantle and calm this down in this election that was rather good at dividing groups on more than just one front.

So no i do not blame the Press when the person in question very well knew what he was doing with his statements and on purpose tried to make the press the enemy, i probably would do the same thing if i had a similar track record as him, since it's the easiest way to try to discredit any negative criticism in the past, by shooting the messenger.

[Noogai131]

To label all the Press as malicious is what took place, what the press does is report true there's a bias there, always is but to label all Press that is negative that is malicious. Even yourself just sort of proved my point by indicating the press that was negative was the "left side". Creating a division, an us vs them game.

It's a bi-partisan system. It will ALWAYS be an us vs them game. But when literally everything is against him from almost ever media outlet, even his own party (fox news), something's not quite right. Is it him doing something wrong? Possibly, although I don't believe that he's done half the garbage he's been accused of.

Trump did receive more then Clinton but that has nothing to do with who the media set their arrows on, Clinton simply didn't make merely as many outrageous statements as Trump did, what was basically a pillar in his campaign strategy. If you put yourself in the middle of a media storm every time it is rather dishonest to come back and claim it is just "The press gunning for you". Especially when asking for explanation on his statements and they were issued often he often added to the outrage rather then to try to dismantle and calm this down in this election that was rather good at dividing groups on more than just one front.

If you seriously believe this you have too much faith in the modern media. There's honestly not much else I could say as anything that I could say on the topic of the current media has been said a thousand times to death, but suffice to say ANY form of modern media (yes. this includes infowars, breitbart etc), has a clear bias, and should be taken with a grain (or cup, depending) of salt.

So no i do not blame the Press when the person in question very well knew what he was doing with his statements and on purpose tried to make the press the enemy, i probably would do the same thing if i had a similar track record as him, since it's the easiest way to try to discredit any negative criticism in the past, by shooting the messenger.

You say he whips the right up into a frenzy on conspiracy theories, yet you handwave the left (let us be sensible, a large majority of mainstream media outlets are left biased or owned) whipping up the rest of the left into a frenzy over exaggerated claims. It's literally the shit happening, but you're handwaving it when the left does it and condemning it when the right does it.

[Stacyrect]

Hasn't the trump crowd been feared into thinking that anything negatively reported about him in the media is a falsehood and a personal attack with no context?

If that's true there really is no surprise against this hostile rejection since they have been conditioned to see anything remotely negative as an attack. What is a good way to create division may i add. Well americans optimism have survived Bush i'm sure it will survive another crazy out of touch president.

Feared? No. Are we skeptical? For the most part yeah. It's kinda tough when you have a bias'd media who are willing to fabricate and completely misrepresent a story to push an agenda. It's one side always trying to say they are better then the other, when really they are both pretty awful lol.

[SirBeef]

Feared? No. Are we skeptical? For the most part yeah. It's kinda tough when you have a bias'd media who are willing to fabricate and completely misrepresent a story to push an agenda. It's one side always trying to say they are better then the other, when really they are both pretty awful lol.

Why is it an outrage now when it happens to a supposed Republican? Fox News invented this type of biased media coverage back in 1996, where opinions were considered fact and coverage was extremely biased and usually false.

[Acidbaron]

It's a bi-partisan system. It will ALWAYS be an us vs them game. But when literally everything is against him from almost ever media outlet, even his own party (fox news), something's not quite right. Is it him doing something wrong? Possibly, although I don't believe that he's done half the garbage he's been accused of.



If you seriously believe this you have too much faith in the modern media. There's honestly not much else I could say as anything that I could say on the topic of the current media has been said a thousand times to death, but suffice to say ANY form of modern media (yes. this includes infowars, breitbart etc), has a clear bias, and should be taken with a grain (or cup, depending) of salt.


You say he whips the right up into a frenzy on conspiracy theories, yet you handwave the left (let us be sensible, a large majority of mainstream media outlets are left biased or owned) whipping up the rest of the left into a frenzy over exaggerated claims. It's literally the shit happening, but you're handwaving it when the left does it and condemning it when the right does it.

No you handwave the left to follow in this mindset of yours, not me this was about Trump against the media, my opinion on american news reporting is pretty negative as a whole. You sort of proved my point by claiming this, i hope you realize that.

I have quite a lot of trust in my own national media where nobody is free of criticism, and where not all media functions purely on private funds but having a private and public counter parts of each other.

Yes the outdated system can create an us vs them game but when you look at even inside those parties it is always a case of picking sides. What is a shame since it rarely seems to be going about policy or regulations over there but more about feelings, personalities and image when looking at presidential elections from a distance. But no, he did create plenty of media storms, unless you want to claim that press of the left to again follow your mindset created a trump android that talks and walks like him, that that same press took over his social media accounts he us and so on.

Anyway, hours in a day are limited and knowing how much time one can waste here, i'll go do something else since this will merely end up going in circles like it always does, i said my mind that's all i really wanted to do anyway

[Deleted]

What conspiracies?

That human accelerated climate change is a hoax
That people working for Obama had names of dead people vote for him
That millions of illegals voted for Clinton
That thousands of American muslims celebrated 9/11
That Obama allowed 250 000 Syrian refugees into the country (actual number; less than 10 000)
That vaccines can cause autism

Enough for ya?

[Stacyrect]

Why is it an outrage now when it happens to a supposed Republican? Fox News invented this type of biased media coverage back in 1996, where opinions were considered fact and coverage was extremely biased and usually false.

I couldn't really comment, I was in the 6th grade at the time so fox news or bias'd media wasn't really a thing I paid attention to. However true that might have been back then, today is a different ball game which every team is getting in on.

[Canpinter]

You only need to accept three facts in order to agree that a recount is a good thing.

1. Even if it dose not change the final overall outcome knowing the results as accurately as we can is a good thing.
2. The election was incredibly close in some areas.
3. People make mistakes in counting sometimes.

[Tijuana]

I really can't believe your feigned ignorance of alt-right. I mean, seriously, spare me - go work your little games on someone who is going to fall for that bullshit.

Blah blah blah - your usual summary and conclusion of a complicated situation, dismissing the salient points and then criticizing them out of hand. It's adorable that you claim above not to know alt-right and previous iterations - you do exactly what they do.

I legit never heard this term until the general election and people started complaining about Steve Bannon. I don't know why you think I would have heard of it before, since I am not a liberal, and don't read liberal publications generally. At any rate, whoever these people are, there aren't many of them if they can only get 250 to show up for a national meeting in Washington.

- - - Updated - - -

I love how re-counters being denied is some sort of tin foil for some of you, even though these were the stated conditions from the beginning. Existing state law is a thing, and it wasn't secretly slipped in decades ago to ensure a Trump victory. Never mind the fact that, no election is US history has been recounted and had more than 2k votes changed, well below the 10k needed in Wisconsin, and laughably far away from the other states.