Timeline for Why is Trump not firm on accepting the results of the 2016 Presidential election?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
33 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 21, 2016 at 19:44 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 39 characters in body
|
| Oct 21, 2016 at 17:39 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 32 characters in body; deleted 27 characters in body
|
| Oct 21, 2016 at 17:27 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 6 characters in body
|
| Oct 21, 2016 at 13:10 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 21 characters in body
|
| S Oct 21, 2016 at 13:08 | history | mod moved comments to chat | |||
| S Oct 21, 2016 at 13:08 | comment | added | Philipp♦ | Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 13:06 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @rougon Agreed. Why don't you do it? | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 13:06 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Oct 21, 2016 at 13:04 | comment | added | rougon | All the more reason to put it as its own question! | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 13:01 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @rougon Actually, Schulkin saying that thousands of votes were cast fraudulently, coupled with the admissions of Foval and Creamer regarding mass voter fraud, and the guy who admitted to being an illegal middle man between DNC and the groups seems admissible as evidence, even in a court of law. | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 13:00 | comment | added | rougon | @Fiksdal A skeptics post that says "I have seen this evidence claiming voter fraud, does that indicate that there is a larger pattern of fraud" would work there. Although written much better than I just stated it! | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 12:59 | comment | added | rougon | @Bobson Definitely agree. As an offhand video of a local election board official making claims that immigrants are capable of fraud is hardly evidence of widespread voter fraud. | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 12:57 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @Bobson Maybe. Skeptics has stringent requirements for what is and is not primarily opinion based. I'm not too familiar with Politics SE, how is it here? I do see a lot of "soft" questions here. | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 12:54 | comment | added | Bobson | @rougon - I agree it should be a separate question, but I think it would be better asked on Skeptics than here. | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 11:55 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 397 characters in body
|
| Oct 21, 2016 at 11:43 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @rougon I agree! It would be very useful if someone asked it as a separate question. And in a way that would ward off the "primarily opinion based" trigger happy close voters. | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 11:41 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Oct 21, 2016 at 11:41 | comment | added | rougon | I'm not saying it's not relevant, but it would also be well-served to be discussed in further detail than in the comments of a question that is largely about motivation. Especially since evidence for "rigging" is by no means straightforward. | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 11:39 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @rougon Yes. And it is Trump's whole rationale for refusing to unconditionally accept, and thus extremely relevant to this answer. | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 11:37 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body; added 56 characters in body; added 13 characters in body
|
| Oct 21, 2016 at 11:36 | comment | added | rougon | Whether or not there is "rigging" seems like a separate question. | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 10:24 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 219 characters in body
|
| Oct 21, 2016 at 8:44 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 21 characters in body
|
| Oct 21, 2016 at 8:37 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 80 characters in body
|
| Oct 21, 2016 at 8:35 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @user4012 I now saw that video in full. Indeed, I believe any answer to this question could do well to include it. I've edited my answer. | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 8:29 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @mbomb007 I have now seen the video you were talking about in full. I have added discussion of it to the answer. Thanks! | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 8:29 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1034 characters in body
|
| Oct 20, 2016 at 14:33 | comment | added | user4012 | @Fiksdal - there is indeed evidence (to add to the pattern, see leaked memos that DHS is fast-tracking immigrant citizenship to happen before election). I deliberately excluded that from my answer for tactical reasons (I didn't want to hurt an extensive answer by downvotes from many P.SE users who vote on pure partisan lines), but there's enough evidence to post a separate answer showing that Trump has a strong basis for claiming there may be fraud - how impactful, if of course impossible to quantify at the moment. | |
| Oct 20, 2016 at 14:10 | comment | added | mbomb007 | It shows that there has been an ongoing pattern of evidence for "rigging" the election, with the DNC sabotaging Bernie Sanders, with illegal immigrants voting, and with people being bused across state borders to vote. His assertion that it's rigged isn't unfounded, and I think that's important to note in the answer, IMHO. | |
| Oct 20, 2016 at 13:59 | comment | added | mbomb007 | Considering that Scott Foval admitted to mass voter fraud on behalf of the DNC... Trump's assertion that it's rigged would be correct. youtu.be/hDc8PVCvfKs ; thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/… | |
| Oct 20, 2016 at 13:13 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 7 characters in body
|
| Oct 20, 2016 at 13:07 | history | edited | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 78 characters in body; added 12 characters in body; added 15 characters in body; added 14 characters in body
|
| Oct 20, 2016 at 12:56 | history | answered | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |