Discussion: Clinton Says She Won't Rule Out Challenging Election Legitimacy


Really sorry to say this, but, Give it a rest lady. Other people can question the legitimacy of der Furor’s election. You can’t. You lost, and you shouldn’t have. Time to sit in the corner.


It doesn’t need to be challenged, it already is illegitimate. And maybe read the article, she says:

“What would be the means to challenge it, if you thought it should be challenged?” Gross asked.

“Basically, I don’t believe there are,” Clinton said. “There are scholars, academics who have arguments that it would be, but I don’t think they’re on strong ground. But people are making those arguments. I just don’t think we have a mechanism.”

She knows it can’t actually be challenged in any meaningful way, but it’s important to get it on the record if the 2016 election WAS legitimate or not, and so far there’s overwhelming evidence it was not. I for one don’t want Hillary to “sit in the corner.” she’s a great spokeperson who has spent her life fighting for liberal and Democratic causes, I hope she keeps it up and hope she’s in the center of the room speaking louder than most.


Obama knew about the Russian tampering before the election. The time to question the legtimacy of the election was the day after Election Day.

If the situation were reversed, you can be sure the Republicans would have been screaming just like they did in 2000. Trump even said in the debate that he would question the legitimacy for whatever reason he wanted, but the Democrats said, “Oh, how awful!!”

Better late than never, I guess. I wish Democrats would learn to fight and not just react.


So if she actually won the election, was defrauded of her rightful place as President of the United States, she should STFU?

I don’t get that.


Gee. Only about a year too late.


The headline gives the impression that she would challenge the election, which in elections means trying to overturn the announced result. She VERY clearly said she doesn’t believe it’s legal or Constitutional to do so.


Oh bullshit. She’s been told that her whole life.

She repeatedly said there’s no legal mechanism to overturn an election here, but that doesn’t mean it was legitimate - and why do you think she should say it is when it’s not just a personal affront if it wasn’t but an assault on American democracy? And it’s not some theoretical hypothesis she’s using to stir up trouble. It’s the subject of enormous amounts of investigation and counter-spin so of course she’s going to be asked about it.

By the way, you know who didn’t “sit in a corner” when he lost? John McCain. So spare me.


Democrats. Always impressive, huh?

She should take it to court if she has a case and let the courts decide if it is Constitutional or not. She has the $14 million from her book deal to spend.


Well, this certainly seems deserving of a tweet-storm.


More violent videos I’m guessing.


Replace golf balls with bullets? Missiles? Maybe a body slam?


Washington’s wheels are only greased by $$$$ donations, the more the greasier!

I’ll go with body slam first.


So if I suspect that you stole my watch but do not have enough evidence – should I tell everyone that you are a confirmed thief?
Alternatively, if you did steal my watch but I did not figure it out for, say, a year – does the watch legitimately belong to you?


I believe that ship has already docked in Novorossiysk.

1 Like

O you know - she’s a woman. We’re ALL supposed to shut up and let the men talk.\

Just ask Kamala Harris or Elizabeth Warren.

IT’s just the same fucking misogyny we’ve seen laid out there like a pair of naked balls since Hillary Clinton first appeared and it was clear she had the potential to be the one who made it all the way.

And by god she is the one with the absolute right to say if the election was legitimate or not - I cannot imagine who else would be any goddamn better.


If only she had campaigned in Michigan and Wisconsin the way she is campaigning for people to buy her book.

Maybe you should mind your own business.