A straightforward question: Why do some of you think Trump is not "legitimate"?

It all depends on three key issues.

1; If we knew about the hacking. The CIA have been very clear that the Russian attempted to interfere in the election. They also said that none of the hacking directly interfered with voting. So, if he knew about the hacking, then is committed treason and should be charged, and tried. If not, he didn't do anything wrong.

2; If you go by the popular vote or the electoral college. Throughout the election, Trump and his supporters attacked the electoral college as a corrupted, partisan body. And Trump said several times that if he lost, if would be because someone rigged the EC vote, and that he would win the popular vote by a landslide. He stated that the EC should be abolished and that only the popular vote matters. So, the opposite happened. Clinton won the popular vote at 52%, while Johnson won 7% and Trump won 39%. If you go by Trump's own professed views, then he can not be considered the rightful President.

 

If Trump has that view he will likely suffer losses during the midterm elections and be a lame duck for the remaining two years of his administration. It has been my observation that once elected, presidents tend to move towards the center, especially if they truly represent all Americans as opposed to just their base.

 

Better to ask them if any of them think he isn't the President as per the constitution.

 

Why go for an irrelevant imagined metric for deciding the President instead of the legal, constitutional one?

The popular vote has no more legal or constitutional basis than the potato vote. To use it as a basis for denying a candidate the Presidency is a coup by stealth.

 

I consider it to be a matter of principle. Trump and his supporters demonized the electoral college for months, going as far as calling it's delegates traitors more than a few times, and only stopped when it became clear that he didn't win the popular vote, and didn't want to (*)(*)(*)(*) off any of his delegates and have them change votes. If Trump had any integrity, he would stick to his guns on the issue and refuse to take office because he lost the popular vote. But, in true Trump fashion, the electoral college is only bad if he think it's against him. The moment Trump needed it to win, all his talking points and Rhetoric went out the window. Anyone who thinks he isn't a politician is a moron.

 

Yes, Trump is an imbecile. That doesn't fundamentally change the structure of your system of government to make his election constitutionally illegitimate.

Besides, both sides are guilty of this. The Democrats made a big spectacle of not challenging the election and "when they go low, we go high", and have proceeded to do nothing but question the election and accuse Trump of having prostitutes (*)(*)(*)(*) all over himself.

If we could have seen their actions now back when they were promising to accept the election it would have been a complete joke. It's only with the hindsight of their election loss that they've changed their minds on the whole peaceful transfer of power thing.

Lesson to learn: it's politics. They're all necessarily (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s who scheme for power. But at the end of the day, the candidate who has fulfilled fhe requirements set by the constitution is the President.

And that President is Trump.

 

Trump never promised to accept the election results. He states outright that if he lost, he would sue because he could only lose if the election were rigged.

 

How is that relevant to him having a constitutional right to take office in 2 days? He won the election as per the requirements of the constitution.

The popular vote is as important as the potato vote. Trump said he'd challenge the election and didn't have to. The Democrats said they wouldn't and continually have since November 8th.

None of this is relevant in any way to the constitutional legitimacy of his presidency. He won a majority of electoral college votes, he therefore will rightly take office in 2 days.

Peaceful transition of power please.

 

I have read a few comments and heard several people suggesting some issue with the US election. The fact is you can hate the man for various reasons and you can complain about the impact of actions of others but Trump was elected (even if you consider the people to be misinformed) according to US electoral system and expectations.

Just like Brexit we saw many protesting the results of the election basically because they were not happy with the results. Of course they were not happy, their particular candidate lost. To then suggest there is no legitimacy to the election is basically sour grapes.

Since winning the vote of the US people, there really can be no question of legitimacy. I dislike the man personally but he may well be the best thing for the US political machine. I just don't see it, but it was certain that voting Clinton in would have given the world more of the same. I know Trump was complaining of fix if he lost so no matter what people were going to grasp for issues in attempt to marginalise the results.

It will pass, but it sort of reminds people of the birth certificate bungle.

 

Trump is illegitimate because he cannot be controlled, will not toe the line, doesn't fit the mold, and therefore threatens the corrupt, crony status quo the left and the right has worked so very hard to establish.

Ironically, those are exactly the reasons he was elected.

 

Bingo has been called ! We have a winner, short yet sweet.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't believe that ! You have a link ?

 

Trump accepted the 2016 election results. Here is the text of his victory speech: http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/09/politics/donald-trump-victory-speech/

I can look out at the dark night sky and say that I will not accept the likelihood that the sun will rise, but, if the sun rises and the sky becomes full of light, I can either "accept" it, or, I can make a complete fool out of myself by rejecting the evidence of my own eyes....

Again, the overall point of my thread is a simple one... some people can hate and despise Donald Trump, even before he takes the Oath of Office... and that's fine. It's anyone's right to hate and despise anyone one wishes. BUT, in my opinion, the official election results, as stipulated by the Constitution of the United States, are NOT in dispute. Those were correctly determined, and final.

I have hoped that we can examine concrete, factual, documented reasons why some people think that Donald Trump was NOT elected according to the stipulations and requirements stated clearly in the Constitution of the United States.... Thank you.

 

Has this been validated by a poll?

 

That's funny, before and after Comey the polls all had Hillary winning. I declare FAIL.

BTW, Hillary lied when she claimed she turned over all emails and that is important. She did not turn over any of Huma's emails which were also federal documents on her server, in fact all of Huma's emails were deleted then bleach bitted to make sure they could never be recovered. Those emails showed up on Weiner's PC. Hillary lied and obfuscated to derail an investigation.

 

First, if you're still caught up in the popular vote, go back and get your GED, and hope they still have civics requirements so you'll finally learn something. If you did graduate HS, go back to your civics teacher and ask him politely, "Coach, why didn't we learn about the electoral college in class?" Maybe since the election, Coach has looked it up and he's now teaching it.

Illegitimate would've been Hillary winning because her husband met with the AG and they put together the Comey strategy that exonerated her. If you didn't want the the FBI to screw up your election, you shouldn't have used the FBI as your pawn. The real lesson, and what we should all be thankful for, is that Comey sent a message to all future candidates. Don't **** with the FBI.

 

As you say, Comey cleared Hillary the second time days BEFORE the election... Trump had no say in that decision. It was calculated to HELP her but obviously it didn't. But, what did any of this have to do with the electoral process as described in the Constitution?

 

Is Trump legitimate? I can't say with absolute certainty. But -

49 hours and counting...........which seems to be very legitimate.

 

Well, to be fair to them, they have as much evidence as Trump did about Ted Cruz's dad assassinating JFK

 

Normally I'd agree with you (and I very much do agree with you in this case) but the US has a history of cheating in the elections. It's not democratic at all. So who can blame them for protesting in the strongest possible terms? Look at what the current government is doing at this very moment: blaming their loss on the Russians! What level of faith would you have in your own government if it behaved in this manner?

 

No. According to the definitions -you- provided.

Your failure is complete.

 

No one can stop you from rejecting reality and substituting your own.

 

Ironic, given the actions of the left - including but limited to whining, crying, throwing tantrums and clearing the shelves of crayons and coloring books - after losing the election.

- - - Updated - - -

I gave you a link to the definition of red herring.
Rather than address the issue in question, you tried to change the subject.

 

Your entire argument is that since the election numbers did not match the pre-election polling, the election numbers must be off.
Why do you not see how laughable this is?

 

You do not understand the definition f "treason".

Trump won the election; any opinion on the EC matters not one whit.

 

Here's the score that counts. States won..............Trump 45
Hillary 7
In football we call that a whoopin'.