Merged The election was stolen/rigged!

[Robert Prey]

I think it has to do with the alternative, which, I suspect, would have been thought to be much worse.
Americans can correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that there is this partly implicit reasoning behind the republican rhetoric to conservative Christians that appears to be going like this:
tax = bigger government = socialism ( = communism = atheism)

Atheists being the most reviled minority in the US, I can imagine why they voted against Obama.

False. The most reviled minority in the US are white, male Christians.

 

[Upchurch]

False. The most reviled minority in the US are white, male Christians.

Which is why a white male Christian could never be elected President of the United States 42 consecutive times since the country's founding.

How many atheists have been President?

 

[uk_dave]

Which is why a white male Christian could never be elected President of the United States 42 consecutive times since the country's founding.

Now come on, they only got elected because they managed to rig the elec.....

.... no wait...

ummm...

I'll get me coat.

 

[Dcdrac]

False. The most reviled minority in the US are white, male Christians.

What new fantasy is this?

 

[uk_dave]

What new fantasy is this?

Apparently Robert perceives himself as a minority and therefore wishes to be seen as a victim.

 

[Upchurch]

What new fantasy is this?

Persecution complex.

 

[H'ethetheth]

False. The most reviled minority in the US are white, male Christians.

Granting this (ahem) for the sake of argument, would you agree that the implication from socialist policies to atheism is justified, or at least something that exists?
And would you agree that this implication would cause this "reviled" and "repressed" white male Christian "minority" to vote against Obama, even if it weren't completely in their interest?

 

[elbe]

Which is why a white male Christian could never be elected President of the United States 42 consecutive times since the country's founding.

It was probably just a fluke.

 

[Robert Prey]

Granting this (ahem) for the sake of argument, would you agree that the implication from socialist policies to atheism is justified, or at least something that exists?
And would you agree that this implication would cause this "reviled" and "repressed" white male Christian "minority" to vote against Obama, even if it weren't completely in their interest?

Sorry, but I don't get the question.

 

[Robert Prey]

Which is why a white male Christian could never be elected President of the United States 42 consecutive times since the country's founding.

How many atheists have been President?

A whole lot. But they call themselves "Christians" and "Democrats".

 

[remirol]

A whole lot. But they call themselves "Christians" and "Democrats".

You pretty much just make this stuff up as you go, don't you?

 

[H'ethetheth]

Sorry, but I don't get the question.

Very well. Simply put:

1a. Do you think that there exists an implication that socialist policies lead to atheism?

1b. Do you think that such an implication is justified?

2b. If there were such an implication, do you think it would cause white male Christians to vote for Romney, even if they believed this not be in their immediate interest?

 

[LSSBB]

And where is the fine nation of Black?

Sheesh, once you have been through a couple of exercises or so you know there are only three nations: Red and Blue , who always seem to be on the verge of fighting each other, and non-aligned green.

 

[Upchurch]

A whole lot. But they call themselves "Christians" and "Democrats".

You pretty much just make this stuff up as you go, don't you?

The difference between a critical thinker and a true believer is in how they treat their concepts and facts. When confronted with a discrepancy between a concept and facts, a critical thinker changes his concept to agree with the facts. A true believer changes the facts to agree with his concept.

When confronted with the fact that 42 consecutive US Presidents were white, male, and Christian, which contradicts his concept that white male Christians the most reviled minority, what were Robert's options? He could have:

1. changed his concept that white male Christians are the most reviled minority.
2. denied the fact that 42 consecutive US Presidents were white, male, and Christian.

Robert obviously chose the second option (utilizing the No True Scotsman logical fallacy), placing himself in the category of "true believer".

 

[Modified]

Outside of Ohio, I would say that the majority for Mittens were just dimwits. Most of the rigging attempted was in Ohio.

In Florida, the attempted voter purges, reduced early voting, insufficient polling places in Democratic areas, and I would even say the overly long ballots, were all intended rigging. Nation wide, poll wait times in Democratic-dominated areas are much longer than in Republican-dominated areas, and I can't find any stats but I'm sure it was much worse in Florida for this past election. That is partly due to higher population density in the Democratic areas, but it seems a poor excuse to me. The number of polling places and poll workers should be in proportion to the population. What Rick Scott didn't count on was that news of attempted voter purges would convince otherwise unenthusiastic Democrats to vote, and that people would be willing to wait seven hours in line to do so.

 

[sts60]

Unsourced? It was fully acredited to Cuccinellis office.

Maybe you have read the quote before here:
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/27/life-on-the-voter-fraud-fringe/

http://features.rr.com/quote/09kr6uyftY9Y7?q=obama

Wow, all of fisteen seconds to varify....

Was our resident birther troll (I have him on ignore) approvingly quoting Ken Cucinelli's office?

You know, the one that said, "There is no question that President Obama legitimately won re-election"?

If so, it would not be the first time he contradicted himself. I'm not sure whether that's part of the trolling, or simple inability to formulate a coherent message, but then, I can't say I care. Four more years... of trolling.

 

[JayUtah]

Was our resident birther troll (I have him on ignore) approvingly quoting Ken Cucinelli's office?

Not his office, but his personal remarks on a radio program in which he claimed Obama won the election with the help of voter fraud.

You know, the one that said, "There is no question that President Obama legitimately won re-election"?

Robert originally tried to say this was "unsourced," not realizing it was one of many official attempts at damage control from Cuccinelli's campaign.

If so, it would not be the first time he contradicted himself.

Indeed, because after trying to refute the retraction, Robert flip-flopped and said the there was no contradiction and that's what Cuccinelli meant all along. He's contradicting himself over Cuccinelli's contradictory statements. Priceless..

I'm not sure whether that's part of the trolling...

Hehe, you're really not sure?

 

[CORed]

If you add up all the single women who need the government for a substitute husband, add to that all of the illegal aliens who voted illegally, and all of the racists who voted based on Obama's alleged race, whether Black or Asian, and all of the government workers expecting to cash in on their lavish pension gravy train, and all of the union workers, bought off with funds stolen from taxpayers, and ditto, all of the teachers, and all of the students receiving interest and loan forgiveness, and the one out of nine Americans on food stamps, and all those who were conned by Obamacare's impossible promises, and all of the LGBTQs and all of the Hollywood airheads -- when you add up all those together, along with the vegetables, well, it really does add up.

Not only does this statement not address the previous claim, it shows a remarkable cognitive dissonance. apparently rich people who voted for Romney because he promised to cut their taxes are noble patriots, yet others who voted for Obama because he supported policies that benefit them are evil leeches who were bought off.

 

[Corsair 115]

Very well. Simply put:

1a. Do you think that there exists an implication that socialist policies lead to atheism?

1b. Do you think that such an implication is justified?

2b. If there were such an implication, do you think it would cause white male Christians to vote for Romney, even if they believed this not be in their immediate interest?

Uh, you can't ask Mr. Prey more than one question in a post. He has stated a couple of times now he only has the capacity to respond to one question at a time.

 

[jaydeehess]

An un-sourced quote from an un-named person. Not worthy of a response.

a sentiment that also applies to second hand reporting of anonymous emailed accusations of voter fraud.

but you probably missed that didn't you