Rant

President elect AND he's soooo gullible.

Dec 2, 2016 7:35PM PST
How a dubious tweet about illegal votes found its way to Trump's megaphone

When Donald Trump tweeted that “millions” of people voted illegally in the presidential election, headline writers were quick to point out that he had no evidence.

The US president-elect had not given his source but fact-checking websites and newspapers traced it to a two-week-old “random tweet” by a little known former Republican party official in Texas. Gregg Phillips claimed on 12 November to have found “more than three million votes cast by non-citizens” – but he too failed to provide data.

Accused of the very topical sin of spreading fake news, all the way to the White House, Phillips is unrepentant. He stands by his original assertion, though he still offers no evidence, and denies that he was Trump’s inspiration in any case.

Phillips tweeted four days after the election: “Completed analysis of database of 180 million voter registrations. Number of non-citizen votes exceeds 3 million. Consulting legal team.”


That Phillips guy is good....REAL GOOD...checked 180 million voter registrations in 4 days.

I wonder how many Million $ THAT cost...That Stein lady crowd sourced about 6 million and hasn't had a count yet.

Discussion is locked

Follow
Reply to: President elect AND he's soooo gullible.
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: President elect AND he's soooo gullible.
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Comments
- Collapse -
Just wondering
Dec 3, 2016 2:49AM PST

I'd say there is a good probability that quite a few votes were cast by people, or in people's names that were not eligible. That's just speculation without an ability to provide proof so I'd agree that it's non-actionable on its own. I also wonder just how many people read stories presenting speculation about individuals and their possible past failings or illegal activity and adopt these as being true even though no real proof is offered. Can you think of anytime that you have done this here in SE?

- Collapse -
RE:That's just speculation without an ability to provide
Dec 3, 2016 4:46AM PST

I'd say there is a good probability that quite a few votes were cast by people, or in people's names that were not eligible. That's just speculation without an ability to provide proof so I'd agree that it's non-actionable on its own.

Are you suggesting there is NO way for anybody...(even Donald J Trump) to check and see IF all the the votes were legally cast? BEFORE he goes and SPECULATES that something is TRUE/A FACT?

When someone running for POTUS gets on the stage and makes a statement THEY should be positive they get the facts correct...OR don't "speculate".

Do YOU agree?

or don't you want to take a position?

- Collapse -
I asked you a question to which I see no answer
Dec 3, 2016 5:08AM PST

You simply responded with a question of your own. AFAIC, there's no further need to continue.

- Collapse -
So YOU don't want to talk about MY OP?
Dec 3, 2016 5:23AM PST

Trump making a wild claim and then not providing any proof or just pretending he never said anything?

Start another thread about posters in SE not doing their own investigations about posts/claims THEY make.

- Collapse -
His statement is no more a 'wild claim'
Dec 3, 2016 6:46AM PST

than Cooper's wild claim that Trump said something 'factually incorrect'....since neither can offer proof. Or don't you agree? Trump isn't an 'investigative' journalist....Cooper is but didn't bother to try to prove his claim against Trump. Whereas there is already plenty of information out there regarding a number of States where illegal votes could easily have been cast.

- Collapse -
RE:Trump isn't an 'investigative' journalist
Dec 3, 2016 7:46AM PST

TheRUMP doesn't 'investigate" anything.

He hires people to investigate(or he claims he does)...they report back(or he claims they report back) with their findings and he still tells a lie.

- Collapse -
Your OP is expressed as a "Rant"
Dec 3, 2016 7:01AM PST

A rant is something I consider to be an oral tantrum. Tantrums are something I consider to be unworthy of discussion but best suited to either be ignored or corrected. The number of times you seem to have already indicted a person based on accusation alone is legion. Wanting to call attention to another person's doing the same (and doing so as a rant) is, IMO, preposterous.

- Collapse -
RE:Tantrums are something I consider to be unworthy
Dec 3, 2016 7:44AM PST

Tantrums are something I consider to be unworthy of discussion

and yet you responded...

Don't interrupt people when they are on a rant?

The number of times you seem to have already indicted a person based on accusation alone is legion

I've personally heard/seen TheRUMP make many claims that I've NEVER seen him provide proof for...NOT that I haven't searched.

- Collapse -
(NT) "The system is rigged" was proven to be true....
Dec 3, 2016 7:56AM PST
- Collapse -
RE:The system is rigged" was proven to be true....
Dec 3, 2016 8:20AM PST

which "system"?...the electoral system?...the one that TheRUMP won?

and you're complaining?

You OK Toni?

- Collapse -
The media system, the administration system,
Dec 3, 2016 8:58AM PST

the DNC system......all rigged. He won because the people figured it out, and NONE of those systems can get over the fact that he TOLD the people HOW it was rigged and they are all still out of touch with reality.

- Collapse -
The DNC was rigged
Dec 3, 2016 11:17AM PST

and the people that supported the DNC discovered it was rigged, so they left?

They didn't enjoy winning?

The DNC had moral standards?

AND they are out of touch with reality?

- Collapse -
What in hell are you talking about?
Dec 3, 2016 12:07PM PST

Are you denying that the DNC was rigged against Sanders and that TWO of their leaders were/are corrupt? Was the liberal and in the tank for hilLIARy media 'moral' when they contacted the DNC to get the questions the DNC wanted asked of Trump for an interview they were doing? Does any of that sound 'moral' to you? And obviously they are out of touch with reality if they think they can replace the head of the DNC with a great 'moral compass' like Ellis.....

- Collapse -
I asked some questions.........
Dec 3, 2016 12:22PM PST

You responded with more questions.

- Collapse -
My questions
Dec 4, 2016 1:53AM PST

were for more clarification from what you were asking, because none of what you asked made sense as usual.

- Collapse -
RE:rant best suited to either be ignored or corrected.
Dec 3, 2016 7:58AM PST

much the same with any post isn't it?.....

There are more than 4 people reading posts in this forum...many ignore, some feel the need to correct.

- Collapse -
29 states for Trump...
Dec 5, 2016 11:12AM PST

....21 states for Hillary. Trump beat her by 8 more states. Better way to look at it than "popular vote" since that's often concentrated in a few populous states and should have negligible power over other states.

CNET Forums

Forum Info