Here we go again
You can't make this shit up
https://cnn.com/2019/03/06/politics/donald-trump-2020-election-illegitimate/index.html
Comments
-
The fuck does 'de-legitimize' mean?
You either win or you don't.
Does Hillary Rodham Clinton want some fucking participation ribbon?
De-legitimize? Christ.
-
Seems problematicPurpleThrobber said:The fuck does 'de-legitimize' mean?
You either win or you don't.
Does Hillary Rodham Clinton want some fucking participation ribbon?
De-legitimize? Christ. -
https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
-
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.” -
Are you proud of being stupid or is there another reason for your post?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.” -
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.” -
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.” -
Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
Fact? -
Hondo holds Hannity to a higher standard than Hillary. Why did the WaPo give Hillary’s “facts” 4 Pinocchio’s Hondo?2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.” -
Hannity's lead as #1 is small and at times Maddow beats him in ratings
We need to be precise
-
Yes race. You got me. Hillary lying about voter registration in Georgia is worse than hannity lying about a pizza gate or Seth Rich.RaceBannon said:
Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
Fact? -
I thought you said that what Hillary said was a "fact" Hondo? What's it like being a pathological liar?2001400ex said:
Yes race. You got me. Hillary lying about voter registration in Georgia is worse than hannity lying about a pizza gate or Seth Rich.RaceBannon said:
Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
Fact? -
It is2001400ex said:
Yes race. You got me. Hillary lying about voter registration in Georgia is worse than hannity lying about a pizza gate or Seth Rich.RaceBannon said:
Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
Fact? -
So I guess Hondo isn't going to tell us why he called Hillary's lie a "fact." Funny how Hondo has tried to hold me responsible for people who talk about Seth Rich, when I've never said a word about it, but when Hillary tells blatant lies about blacks being turned away at the polls Hondo calls it a "fact" and takes no responsibility for it.
-
You don't understand "legitimacy"? Did you go to college?PurpleThrobber said:The fuck does 'de-legitimize' mean?
You either win or you don't.
Does Hillary Rodham Clinton want some fucking participation ribbon?
De-legitimize? Christ.
-
If you can't see the difference between someone bitching and lying about voter rolls. And someone outright making up lies calling someone a murderer and kingpin of a child sex ring. I can't help you. Fuck you are stupid.SFGbob said:So I guess Hondo isn't going to tell us why he called Hillary's lie a "fact." Funny how Hondo has tried to hold me responsible for people who talk about Seth Rich, when I've never said a word about it, but when Hillary tells blatant lies about blacks being turned away at the polls Hondo calls it a "fact" and takes no responsibility for it.
-
Hillary and company said Trump wouldn't accept the results of the election. As usual they were just projecting their own beliefs onto Trump.
That bitch has collusioned and whined since she got whooped. Obozo as well as all the dems. Now we know the collusion story, which is the invention of Hillary, is as bogus as the rest of their BS.
Now the left wants to investigate every aspect of Trumps life because they couldn't find anything.
Communists suck! -
Da fuq are you talking about? This was on live TV.Sledog said:Hillary and company said Trump wouldn't accept the results of the election. As usual they were just projecting their own beliefs onto Trump.
That bitch has collusioned and whined since she got whooped. Obozo as well as all the dems. Now we know the collusion story, which is the invention of Hillary, is as bogus as the rest of their BS.
Now the left wants to investigate every aspect of Trumps life because they couldn't find anything.
Communists suck!
https://youtu.be/cP0G4vJ5OMw -
Each side flips their stories on Election Day. Completely crass by both.2001400ex said:
Da fuq are you talking about? This was on live TV.Sledog said:Hillary and company said Trump wouldn't accept the results of the election. As usual they were just projecting their own beliefs onto Trump.
That bitch has collusioned and whined since she got whooped. Obozo as well as all the dems. Now we know the collusion story, which is the invention of Hillary, is as bogus as the rest of their BS.
Now the left wants to investigate every aspect of Trumps life because they couldn't find anything.
Communists suck!https://youtu.be/cP0G4vJ5OMw -
Can you see the difference between you lying and claiming what Hillary said was a "fact" and me never once saying anything Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
If you can't see the difference between someone bitching and lying about voter rolls. And someone outright making up lies calling someone a murderer and kingpin of a child sex ring. I can't help you. Fuck you are stupid.SFGbob said:So I guess Hondo isn't going to tell us why he called Hillary's lie a "fact." Funny how Hondo has tried to hold me responsible for people who talk about Seth Rich, when I've never said a word about it, but when Hillary tells blatant lies about blacks being turned away at the polls Hondo calls it a "fact" and takes no responsibility for it.
If she was lying Hondo, why did you call it a "fact?" -
Why don't you pull up what I said. I didn't say it was fact. Idiot.SFGbob said:
Can you see the difference between you lying and claiming what Hillary said was a "fact" and me never once saying anything Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
If you can't see the difference between someone bitching and lying about voter rolls. And someone outright making up lies calling someone a murderer and kingpin of a child sex ring. I can't help you. Fuck you are stupid.SFGbob said:So I guess Hondo isn't going to tell us why he called Hillary's lie a "fact." Funny how Hondo has tried to hold me responsible for people who talk about Seth Rich, when I've never said a word about it, but when Hillary tells blatant lies about blacks being turned away at the polls Hondo calls it a "fact" and takes no responsibility for it.
If she was lying Hondo, why did you call it a "fact?"
Seriously. Read for comprehension. -
What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.” -
Do you know the difference between "comment based on fact" and "a factual comment" is? Remember the whole discussion on lying with statistics? Of course you are too simple minded to understand this. So you go with "pathological liar".SFGbob said:
What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.” -
What fact was her comment base on since it is a false statement?2001400ex said:
Do you know the difference between "comment based on fact" and "a factual comment" is? Remember the whole discussion on lying with statistics? Of course you are too simple minded to understand this. So you go with "pathological liar".SFGbob said:
What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
JFC you really are pathological -
Read the WaPo articleRaceBannon said:
What fact was her comment base on since it is a false statement?2001400ex said:
Do you know the difference between "comment based on fact" and "a factual comment" is? Remember the whole discussion on lying with statistics? Of course you are too simple minded to understand this. So you go with "pathological liar".SFGbob said:
What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
JFC you really are pathological
-
HHusky said:
You don't understand "legitimacy"? Did you go to college?PurpleThrobber said:The fuck does 'de-legitimize' mean?
You either win or you don't.
Does Hillary Rodham Clinton want some fucking participation ribbon?
De-legitimize? Christ.
The fuck does it matter whether Donald Trump or Hillary or Bozo the Clown makes a statement that the election is "de-legitimate". There are election commissions in every county and parish in this country. Somehow they all of a sudden got bamboozled after 250 years of elections in this country?
That's ridiculous. And to now predict that is what Trump is going to say years before the event happens...that's even more ridiculous.
Have you ever once had a thought that goes against your party line?
-
Fuck off2001400ex said:
Read the WaPo articleRaceBannon said:
What fact was her comment base on since it is a false statement?2001400ex said:
Do you know the difference between "comment based on fact" and "a factual comment" is? Remember the whole discussion on lying with statistics? Of course you are too simple minded to understand this. So you go with "pathological liar".SFGbob said:
What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
JFC you really are pathological -
I do have to chuckle at how you read the fox news article quoting the WaPo article. But you won't actually go to WaPo itself and read it. Keep your head buried in the sand. Using statistics to lie is much worse than calling someone a murderer and a child sex ring Mastermind.RaceBannon said:
Fuck off2001400ex said:
Read the WaPo articleRaceBannon said:
What fact was her comment base on since it is a false statement?2001400ex said:
Do you know the difference between "comment based on fact" and "a factual comment" is? Remember the whole discussion on lying with statistics? Of course you are too simple minded to understand this. So you go with "pathological liar".SFGbob said:
What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
JFC you really are pathological -
I read it. You're a fucking liar. Her statement wasn't based on fact it was a fucking lie and instead of admitting that you actually had the gall to defend it.2001400ex said:
I do have to chuckle at how you read the fox news article quoting the WaPo article. But you won't actually go to WaPo itself and read it. Keep your head buried in the sand. Using statistics to lie is much worse than calling someone a murderer and a child sex ring Mastermind.RaceBannon said:
Fuck off2001400ex said:
Read the WaPo articleRaceBannon said:
What fact was her comment base on since it is a false statement?2001400ex said:
Do you know the difference between "comment based on fact" and "a factual comment" is? Remember the whole discussion on lying with statistics? Of course you are too simple minded to understand this. So you go with "pathological liar".SFGbob said:
What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
JFC you really are pathological
