Absolutely EXCELLENT article; thanks!

It proves perfectly something I've said for years: Democrats are the 
biggest hypocrites on the planet.

On Saturday, October 22, 2016 at 7:21:37 AM UTC-4, Travis wrote:
>
>
>
>
> [[[  When she loses her tantrum will be heard and felt for a thousand 
> miles.  ]]
>
>
>
>
> *http://tinyurl.com/jbmdnt6 <http://tinyurl.com/jbmdnt6>*
>
> *Will Hillary Clinton Accept the Results if She Loses?*
>
> Democracy doesn’t mean Democratic Party rule. 
>
> October 21, 2016 
>
> *Daniel Greenfield* <http://www.frontpagemag.com/author/daniel-greenfield> 
>
>    
> <http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/264570/will-hillary-clinton-accept-results-if-she-loses-daniel-greenfield#disqus_thread>
>  
>
> [image: Description: 
> http://www.frontpagemag.com/sites/default/files/styles/article_full/public/uploads/2016/10/wre.jpg?itok=ht28pP8R]
>
> *Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is 
> a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.*
>
> The headlines are in. Trump is the “anti-Democratic” candidate because he 
> refuses to rule out challenging the results of an election that has yet to 
> take place. Such a course of action is “beyond the pale”. It’s a threat to 
> democracy. And it is utterly and thoroughly unacceptable.
>
> Except when Democrats do it.
>
> It was the day after the election. While the Democratic Party faithful 
> waited in the rain in Nashville, William Daley strode out and announced, 
> “Our campaign continues”. Al Gore had called George W. Bush to withdraw his 
> concession. “Are you saying what I think you’re saying?" a baffled Bush 
> asked. “You don’t have to be snippy about it," Gore retorted snippily.
>
> Gore did eventually concede. Though years later he would attempt to 
> retract his concession a second time. But his political movement never did 
> concede. It remained a widespread belief in left-wing circles that 
> President Bush was illegitimately elected and that President Gore was the 
> real winner.
>
> How mainstream is that belief?
>
> When Hillary dragged Gore away from playing with his Earth globe to 
> campaign for her, the crowd booed at his mention of the election and then 
> chanted, “You won, you won”.
>
> *Hillary grinned* 
> <http://hotair.com/archives/2016/10/20/last-week-hillary-agreed-gore-won-2000-election/>
>  
> and nodded.
>
> Hillary Clinton has always believed that President Bush illegitimately 
> took office. She *has told Democrats* 
> <http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/441269/hillary-clinton-2002-george-w-bush-was-selected-not-elected>
>  
> that Bush was “selected” rather than “elected”. In Nigeria, of all places, 
> she implied that Jeb Bush had rigged the election for his brother.
>
> But it’s not unprecedented, beyond the pale or utterly unacceptable when 
> Democrats do it.
>
> It’s just business as usual.
>
> The media’s focus has been on whether Trump would accept the results if he 
> loses. Yet a better question might be whether Hillary Clinton would accept 
> her defeat.
>
> Even when it came to the battle for the Democratic nomination, Hillary 
> Clinton refused to concede defeat until the bitter end and then past it. 
> Not only did Hillary refuse to drop out even when Obama was the clear 
> winner, while her people threatened a convention floor fight, but she 
> insisted on staying on in the race for increasingly bizarre and even 
> downright disturbing reasons.
>
> In South Dakota, Hillary explained that there was no reason for her to 
> drop out because somebody might shoot Barack Obama, "We all remember Bobby 
> Kennedy was assassinated in June in California."
>
> There’s something disturbing in the revelation that Hillary was basing her 
> decision to stay in the race in the hope that her rival would be 
> assassinated.
>
> Obama’s spokesman said that her remark “has no place in this campaign”. 
> But it had a place inside Hillary Clinton’s very warped brain which 
> preferred to see Obama die than concede the election to him.
>
> If that’s how Hillary felt about a fellow Democrat, imagine how she feels 
> about Trump.
>
> Even after Obama had clinched the delegate votes, Hillary’s speech brought 
> back the Gore argument insisting that, “Nearly 18 million of you cast your 
> votes for our campaign, carrying the popular vote with more votes than any 
> primary candidate in history. Even when the pundits and the naysayers 
> proclaimed week after week that this race was over, you kept on voting.”
>
> Then the fabulously wealthy Hillary asked those 18 million people to go to 
> her website and give her money while refusing to make any decision on 
> ending her campaign. It took her another day to do that.
>
> It’s not as if the Obama side was any better. It was arguably worse. 
> Governor Wilder, an Obama ally, threatened a return of the 1968 Chicago 
> Democratic convention riots if Hillary won. "If you think 1968 was bad, you 
> watch; in 2008, it will be worse,” Wilder warned.
>
> Unprecedented. Outrageous. Beyond the pale. Except this is how Democrats 
> act even to each other.
>
> Now how would they respond to a Trump victory? Would they urge Hillary to 
> concede or to fight on? Would they stage more riots while claiming voter 
> disenfranchisement had stolen the election?
>
> Hillary Clinton has made it clear that she views Trump’s candidacy as 
> illegitimate. She has called him “unfit” and described his supporters as 
> “deplorables”. Democrats, all the way up to the White House, are constantly 
> accusing Republicans of scheming to disenfranchise voters. These “schemes” 
> involve asking undocumented Democrats to show some ID instead of relying on 
> an honor system and removing illegitimate voters from the rolls. But beyond 
> enabling voter fraud, such arguments can easily be employed to attack the 
> legitimacy of a Republican winner. They provide the fodder for another 
> Florida.
>
> Does anyone really believe that Hillary Clinton, who couldn’t even 
> graciously concede to Obama will graciously concede to Trump?
>
> And, given the fact that Hillary won the nomination by using the DNC to 
> rig the process, leading to the resignation of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, 
> are Trump’s concerns of a rigged election illegitimate?
>
> Donald Trump has clarified that he would accept “a clear election result” 
> but that he was “being asked to waive centuries of legal precedent designed 
> to protect the voters.”
>
> And he’s right. No one preemptively cedes elections. And Hillary Clinton 
> has faced accusations of abusive and fraudulent tactics from Democratic 
> rivals in two different presidential elections.
>
> Why should Republicans assume that she’ll treat them better than she 
> treated Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders?
>
> Not all that long ago, the left wanted Gore to fight to the bitter end. A 
> Gore adviser recalled, "People were calling us from everywhere, telling us, 
> 'Don't concede.'" Left-wing voices urged Bernie Sanders to stay in the race 
> long after it became obvious that the left-winger had no realistic path to 
> victory left.
>
> But the same behavior that is virtuous when Democrats do it becomes an 
> unpardonable sin when Republicans take it up.
>
> That’s a pernicious double standard that cannot and should not be allowed 
> to stand.
>
> When Democrats warn of voter disenfranchisement, the media backs them up. 
> When Republicans complain about voter fraud, they are accused of voter 
> suppression. When Democrats fight elections past the point that they’re 
> lost, then they are courageous. But when Republicans do it, they are a 
> threat to democracy.
>
> But democracy does not mean Democratic Party rule. That’s just the mistake 
> that the media makes.
>
> Whatever rules we have, run both ways. Any practices, new or old, also 
> apply to both sides. If challenging election results is legitimate, then it 
> is so for both sides. Whatever options were available to Gore and Hillary 
> cannot help but be available to Trump.
>
> That is how democracy, rather than Democratic Party rule, works.
>
>  
>
>
> ------------------------------
> [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> 
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. 
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> 
>
>
>
> __._,_.___
> ------------------------------
> Posted by: "Beowulf" <[email protected] <javascript:>> 
> ------------------------------
>
>
> Visit Your Group 
> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmY2Y1YnNzBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NzcwNjkwMDg->
>  
>    
>    
> [image: Yahoo! Groups] 
> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMWtwYWo4BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ3NzA2OTAwOA-->
>  
> • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • 
> Unsubscribe <javascript:> • Terms of Use 
> <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> 
>
> __,_._,___
>
>
>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to