From the "recount" days
Posted on 10/21/2016 1:05:29 PM PDT by Kaslin
Pressed by moderator Chris Wallace as to whether he would accept defeat should Hillary Clinton win the election, Donald Trump replied, "I will tell you at the time. I'll keep you in suspense."
"That's horrifying," said Clinton, setting off a chain reaction on the post-debate panels with talking heads falling all over one another in purple-faced anger, outrage and disbelief.
"Disqualifying!" was the cry on Clinton cable.
"Trump Won't Say If He Will Accept Election Results," wailed The New York Times. "Trump Won't Vow to Honor Results," ran the banner in The Washington Post.
But what do these chattering classes and establishment bulletin boards think the Donald is going to do if he falls short of 270 electoral votes?
Lead a Coxey's Army on Washington and burn it down as British General Robert Ross did in August 1814, while "Little Jemmy" Madison fled on horseback out the Brookville Road?
What explains the hysteria of the establishment?
In a word, fear.
The establishment is horrified at the Donald's defiance because, deep within its soul, it fears that the people for whom Trump speaks no longer accept its political legitimacy or moral authority.
It may rule and run the country, and may rig the system through mass immigration and a mammoth welfare state so that Middle America is never again able to elect one of its own. But that establishment, disconnected from the people it rules, senses, rightly, that it is unloved and even detested.
Having fixed the future, the establishment finds half of the country looking upon it with the same sullen contempt that our Founding Fathers came to look upon the overlords Parliament sent to rule them.
Establishment panic is traceable to another fear: Its ideology, its political religion, is seen by growing millions as a golden calf, a 20th-century god that has failed.
Trump is "talking down our democracy," said a shocked Clinton.
After having expunged Christianity from our public life and public square, our establishment installed "democracy" as the new deity, at whose altars we should all worship. And so our schools began to teach.
Half a millennia ago, missionaries and explorers set sail from Spain, England and France to bring Christianity to the New World.
Today, Clintons, Obamas and Bushes send soldiers and secularist tutors to "establish democracy" among the "lesser breeds without the Law."
Unfortunately, the natives, once democratized, return to their roots and vote for Hezbollah, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, using democratic processes and procedures to re-establish their true God.
And Allah is no democrat.
By suggesting he might not accept the results of a "rigged election" Trump is committing an unpardonable sin. But this new cult, this devotion to a new holy trinity of diversity, democracy and equality, is of recent vintage and has shallow roots.
For none of the three -- diversity, equality, democracy -- is to be found in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Federalist Papers or the Pledge of Allegiance. In the pledge, we are a republic.
When Ben Franklin, emerging from the Philadelphia convention, was asked by a woman what kind of government they had created, he answered, "A republic, if you can keep it."
Among many in the silent majority, Clintonian democracy is not an improvement upon the old republic; it is the corruption of it.
Consider: Six months ago, Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, the Clinton bundler, announced that by executive action he would convert 200,000 convicted felons into eligible voters by November.
If that is democracy, many will say, to hell with it.
And if felons decide the electoral votes of Virginia, and Virginia decides who is our next U.S. president, are we obligated to honor that election?
In 1824, Gen. Andrew Jackson ran first in popular and electoral votes. But, short of a majority, the matter went to the House.
There, Speaker Henry Clay and John Quincy Adams delivered the presidency to Adams -- and Adams made Clay secretary of state, putting him on the path to the presidency that had been taken by Jefferson, Madison, Monroe and Adams himself.
Were Jackson's people wrong to regard as a "corrupt bargain" the deal that robbed the general of the presidency?
The establishment also recoiled in horror from Milwaukee Sheriff Dave Clarke's declaration that it is now "torches and pitchforks time."
Yet, some of us recall another time, when Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas wrote in "Points of Rebellion":
"We must realize that today's Establishment is the new George III. Whether it will continue to adhere to his tactics, we do not know. If it does, the redress, honored in tradition, is also revolution."
Baby-boomer radicals loved it, raising their fists in defiance of Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew.
But now that it is the populist-nationalist right that is moving beyond the niceties of liberal democracy to save the America that they love, elitist enthusiasm for "revolution" seems more constrained.
What goes around comes around.
Remember when Trump said he didn’t let his enemies know what he was doing??? He isn’t!!!
Yes I do, and he sure isn’t.
They are. There is a very good chance that Trump will win. If he does win they know their corrupt gravy train in Washington will come to a stop.
it was a trap question, if he said he would accept the results it would have been a green light to Hillary’s minions to commit mass voter fraud and dirty tricks, as it is they have to realize what they do is subject to scrutiny...and if they fail they will likely go to jail...
Trump is giving a warning to those inclined not to try their crap as they will be the ones going to jail and if illegal deported.
He can afford to sue them in civil court. I love him for his enemies.
I don’t understand the liberal reaction to this. I really don’t.
When Al Gore challenged election results in 2000, the liberals were all in favor of that. The liberals filed numerous lawsuits, which got consolidated into challenges which were settled by the Supreme Court.
In 2008, Al Franken and his boys challenged the Senate election results in Minnesota. Al lost on election night by about 700 votes, but numerous recounts and a court challenge which reached the Minnesota Supreme Court, gave Al the election.
So let’s get this straight. Liberals are aghast that a Republican might challenge election results from a disputed election. But the liberals have freely done so themselves in recent years.
Where Reagan had Sam Donaldson to act like a bitter little child every day during his administration, Trump will have 50 reporters acting like him.
Obama never gets the tough question.
That’s all Trump will get. And then they’ll spar with him when he answers.
I’d start scratching off press passes for anyone who acted rudely. “Send over another one. Your organization gets one more chance. There will be civility or your organization is out for a year.”
I was quite surprised when Trump didn’t come back around with something like “Was it horrifying when Al Gore challenged the election in Florida?” or at least address that event in some manner.
Challenging an election isn’t horrifying. Election Fraud is. There are legal previsions for challenging an election for that reason as well as honest errors.
What’s TRULY horrifying is a Hillary Clinton presidency. She want’s to cripple the investor class. THAT is horrifying!!
Milwaukee Sheriff Dave Clarke’s declaration that it is now “torches and pitchforks time.”
****************************
It was pitchforks and torches time on Usurpation Day, January 20,2009
We have this one last shot at keeping our country using the ballot box thanks to Donald Trump.
Vote as if your life depends on it, because it does.
Coaxey’s Army sounds good
Key sentence. It has been thus ever since Trump started to ascend.
If Trump wins, I can almost guarantee you that what we’ve come to know as White House press briefings will come to an end. Instead, Trump will have an unscripted appearance before the press that will come across as an audition for “Saturday Night Live” — and any news organization who he feels was part of the effort to rig this election won’t even be invited. The networks he identified by pointing them out at the Al Smith Dinner in NYC last night will be the first ones on the “dis-invited” list.
I think Trump may have reached the point that many gun owners have reached with their opposition...reasoned debate has not worked, so "Screw You" will be my only argument.
“I was quite surprised when Trump didn’t come back around with something like “Was it horrifying when Al Gore challenged the election in Florida?”
Or maybe, “Why would I NOT challenge an obviously fraudulent election?!?”
From the "recount" days
Talking down our democracy?
We’re supposed to be a representative republic, but nobody is representing us.
Yeah sure it was, but did you vote for the Republican Nominee in the 2008 election, or did you sit the election out because you did not like the nominee?
He doesn’t seem to be bothered by the press overall.
He talks to them all the time. He stands his ground, and that’s fine.
I don’t expect the press to always agree, and they should ask follow-up questions, but you can do that in a reasoned way too.
As long as they comport themselves decently in person, and write truth in for their publications, I wouldn’t have a problem. Where one or both of those measures break down, I’d have a big problem.
I’d warn them and then cut them off.
He needs to have press conferences, and explain his programs.
He’ll do it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.