Obviously you're too stupid to understand what he meant by that.

Please enlighten us on what he meant.

I'd like to hear your take on it. It's pretty clear to me what he meant.

oh right now he meant something else when your crush lost a slanted election. its little wonder why no one likes you

deny math
deny election
deny reality

cry like sissy when bamboozled by facts
enjoy being a self-confessed “snarky privileged lefty” stuck in the comfort of stepdaddy’s basement in the suburbs lmfao, pathetic..

Trump constantly talked about the election being rigged through voter fraud or some shadowy group changing votes or something, because he believed he would likely lose. Obama countered that with basic facts and reasoning:



Obviously Obama isn't saying that other factors(like Comey's press conference/letter or Russia's interference) can't have an effect on the election. This is pretty basic stuff.

You didn't elaborate?

Trump was losing in the polls and throwing a little hissy fit about it. Obama said it's near impossible to rig elections and to stop being a baby. I believe his exact words were "you need to respect the outcome" - might be a little off.

Do you see the irony? The issue with that and our current predicament.

yes he did elaborate. Trump implied voting would be altered via hacking, Obama said that cant/wont happen. and it didnt. it's a pretty simple 1, 2, 3 situation.

1. Trump "they're going to hack the elections, get out there and make sure nothing fishy happens" thats a direct paraphrase, trump told his supporters to watch the election sites.

2. Obama "that wont happen, no need for potential violence at the polls"

3. no poll nonsense happened, other stuff did, pointless investigation followed.

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-tells-his-supporters-to-watch-polling-places-in-majority-black-cities-63c985af5a0d/

bingo!

This post was edited by thesnipa on Oct 10 2019 11:29am

holding the president accountable for his actions is not the same as not respecting the outcome. no one (except trump and his cultists) suggests the result of the electoral college is fake. no one (except trump and his cultists) claims there were millions of illegal votes in favour of the opposite party. pointing out the circumstances of the election is fair. that's what nuanced people do - especially if the candidate with millions of fewer votes won.
this whole narrative is only a thing because trump is so insecure about the fact that the people didn't actually want him (not that they gave hillary a confident vote, far from it), that he benefited from the system and the extraordinary circumstances - that's why he lies and bitches and engages in conspiracy theories about it.

in your heart of hearts you KNOW that a democratic president would LONG have been impeached if they displayed only a fraction of the cronyism, corruption, and disregard for the rule of law that trump disgraced the office with. so acting like democrats finally threatening some kind of consequence (unsurprisingly and despicably not following trump's blatant obstruction of justice, and previous misuses of the office, but to protect one of their establishment's own) for his behaviour is somehow 'not respecting the outcome of the election', is a dishonest talking point at best...

not wrong but Trump would have been impeached in the first 100 days if they had both house and senate. that, above conduct of the president, has been the deciding factor on who gets impeached and when. Nanci's reluctance is driven by a red senate.

I don't think either side would be impeached for what Trump as done / not done. That's me being honest. Bill Clinton got a hummer in the oval office, lied about it and was caught for perjury with no other explanation and he still wasn't impeached in the senate.

Separation of Powers at work, i guess.

Trump is extremely insecure, and that's no sarcasm. I agree it's why he lashes out about impeachment, collusion, and all the other shit dem's throw his way. Dem's are smart to try and obstruct Trump as much as possible, he's very weak minded.