Skip to main content
Update
Non-financial boards have been closed.

Non-financial boards have been closed but will continue to be accessible in read-only form. If you're disappointed, we understand. Thank you for being an active participant in this community. We have more community features in development that we look forward to sharing soon.

Fool.com | The Motley Fool Community
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 0
...and I am not talking about Stacy's mom either.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/stacey-abrams-launches-2nd-campai...

Democrat Stacey Abrams announced Wednesday that she will mount a second campaign for governor in Georgia, setting up a potential rematch with incumbent Republican Brian Kemp in 2022.

I wonder if she thinks she is running for re-election as she has never conceded her last loss.

Rather funny that no one ever complained about that when she did it...but....

ww
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I wonder if she thinks she is running for re-election as she has never conceded her last loss.

Yes she did concede the loss.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Not really

"So, to be clear, this is not a speech of concession.

Concession means to acknowledge an action is right, true or proper. As a woman of conscience and faith, I cannot concede. But my assessment is that the law currently allows no further viable remedy."

https://qz.com/1468560/read-stacey-abrams-full-concession-sp...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Yes she did concede the loss.

Can you post a link to that and when it happened. So far you are the only one to post such.

ww
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Concession means to acknowledge an action is right, true or proper. As a woman of conscience and faith, I cannot concede. But my assessment is that the law currently allows no further viable remedy."

So it is her faith that stops her? Sounds like Hillary, if she can't have it no one will. Thus the Russian Collusion scam.

ww
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Rather funny that no one ever complained about that when she did it...but....

Maybe because she didn't encourage anyone to break the law on her behalf.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Rather funny that no one ever complained about that when she did it...but....

Maybe because she didn't encourage anyone to break the law on her behalf.


The topic at hand was conceding to a "lost" election, young grasshopper.

Stay focused, alert and aware and by God stay on topic. We also discussed Gore's late concession only after the Supreme Court spanked him with a loss. Then of course there is the business of Hillary advising Biden to "never concede" the presidential election. I was asking if failing to concede was really the core grip, then how did these folks warrant a pass?

ww
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
The topic at hand is dumb. It's irrelavent if a political candidate concedes or not.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
The topic at hand is dumb. It's irrelavent if a political candidate concedes or not.

True. But it is wholly unacceptable if they do crazy stuff to try and 'fix' their loss - like Trump has and continues to do.

It is likely criminal.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
The topic at hand is dumb. It's irrelavent if a political candidate concedes or not.

True. But it is wholly unacceptable if they do crazy stuff to try and 'fix' their loss - like Trump has and continues to do.

It is likely criminal.

++++++++++++++++++++++++

OMG. I mostly agree with your first sentence. But then again why do so many get so angry and cite this as a major issue? It is not fair nor balanced thinking.

The second statement I would normally agree, but the goal posts of judgment have been totally moved for the BLM violence,... 2 Billion $ wasted on damages, 2000+ wounded, hurt, killed, sought medical help. Not to mention lives ruined, livelihoods destroyed, neighborhood business and the residents hopelessly damaged. But hey, they are mostly peaceful protesters right? They are upset about some issues and this is deemed an acceptable thing to do, over and over again. So with that, some folks followed the lead of the BLM riots and became mostly peaceful protesters themselves. And why not it is generally accepted behavior for everyone else as these 01/06 folks obviously have some pent up anger.

Just what is the real difference in the BLM cluster of destruction and the Jan 6 mostly peaceful protesters? I can answer that if you and yours will not.

Fasten your seat belts please.

ww
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"The topic at hand is dumb. It's irrelavent if a political candidate concedes or not.

True. But it is wholly unacceptable if they do crazy stuff to try and 'fix' their loss - like Trump has and continues to do.

It is likely criminal."

++++++++++++++++++++++++

OMG. I mostly agree with your first sentence. But then again why do so many get so angry and cite this as a major issue? It is not fair nor balanced thinking.

No one cares about the first, really. What people are angry about is in the second sentence.

The second statement I would normally agree, but the goal posts of judgment have been totally moved for the BLM violence,...

You guys all get your taking points from the same place. It is laughable and ridiculous to compare what you call "the BLM violence" (various cities experienced protests that turned violent over a period of months - generally due to racial unrest spurred by the results of various criminal cases that many deemed racist) and the January 6th insurrection at our capitol.

These are VERY different things. They are not comparable. Lumping all the violence from all over the country over an entire summer together makes no sense whatsoever. Trying to compare that lumped together phony construct to Jan 6th borders on utter insanity. Who is telling you guys to do keep doing this?

Just what is the real difference in the BLM cluster of destruction and the Jan 6 mostly peaceful protesters? I can answer that if you and yours will not.

While the premise is ridiculous, as I said, your 'mostly peaceful protestors' description applies to all the incidents you are referring to, not just the one you are trying to rationalize.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
While the premise is ridiculous, as I said, your 'mostly peaceful protestors' description applies to all the incidents you are referring to, not just the one you are trying to rationalize.

I would like to treat them all the same from a law and order point of view. I do not seek to rationalize one and not the other. You are.

If one is wrong, the rest is wrong as well. I am a unite er under the law, not a divider allowing some to squeak by. I don't excuse racism either, just call it where I see it.

Why not get on board? "You don't need no ticket,... just get on board".


ww
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
True. But it is wholly unacceptable if they do crazy stuff to try and 'fix' their loss - like Trump has and continues to do.

Yep. The "new" poster knows this. Which is why he/she is focusing on the idea that lack of a concession speech instead of the treasonous actions by his fellow cultists.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
True. But it is wholly unacceptable if they do crazy stuff to try and 'fix' their loss - like Trump has and continues to do.

Yep. The "new" poster knows this. Which is why he/she is focusing on the idea that lack of a concession speech instead of the treasonous actions by his fellow cultists.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

So did Hillary and her agents do the full court press on Russian Collusion for 4+ years in an effort to channel their anger at their loss? Maybe just to cover their previous collusion and dirty deeds? Maybe just to see how many good soldiers they could manufacture?

Ya think????


ww
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
“While the premise is ridiculous, as I said, your 'mostly peaceful protestors' description applies to all the incidents you are referring to, not just the one you are trying to rationalize.”

I would like to treat them all the same from a law and order point of view. I do not seek to rationalize one and not the other. You are.

Actually, no, I am not. But you wish to create a single event that you make up in your head, cobbled together and collected over different times and places, and compare that concocted story it to a real single event you want to defend. I have no idea why, but you aren’t alone. Many on the right have been trying to sell this same odd story.

What I don’t understand is why you all want to defend an attack on our capitol.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"What I don’t understand is why you all want to defend an attack on our capitol."

What I don't understand is why ...you... have never disclaimed any of the attacks on our American cities by radical leftists.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
What I don’t understand is why you all want to defend an attack on our capitol.


++++++++++++++++++++

Across many cities in the USA was a swarm of chaotic, violent protests, looting, murder and injury that these cities political representatives did very little to put down. They were call mostly peaceful protests. So when the same unruly type "crowd" approaches the work place and homes of the USA's elected officials it is now treated so differently. Why? If it was ok to ignore and tolerate such behavior across the country by our elected officials, then they should be equallly tolerant of the same coming to their work place community. The rest of the country was left to "suck it up" and tolerate it.

Until these same leaders realize that we cannot have this in their house and equally so anywhere else in the rest of the country, then we will continue to have chaos. Double standard.

Examine this.... In the rest of the country it was not allowed to have the National Guard called in to control the out of control rioters/looters. But in DC they cried about where was the National Guard and who kept them away or late to the event! In the rest of the country it was decided to cry out "De-fund the police", but in DC the cops got commendations and raises.In fact the guy who killed a unarmed woman who was a USA veteran was protected and hid by not releasing his name. In the rest of the country any authority figure who stopped or confronted the rioters was oppressive and chastised. Are we seeing a double standard yet???

The FBI is combing all the photographs at the DC thingy and searching out every one and anyone who looks like some one to "bring them to justice". Yet in the rest of the country we have all kinds of video of the looting and such, yet no FBI combing the woods for those events. Double standard seen yet? There was plenty of footage showing the arms full of looted goods as folks ran out of stores laughing and torching the stores and neighborhood. Yet little interest in tracking down these folks and bringing them to justice.

We call all those other events mostly peaceful protests, yet in DC the same is a Riot/insurrection. See the double standard? As stand alone events you bet I would call for law and order efforts, but many leaders in DC remained silent until it happened to them. Then they milked it as no good crisis goes to waste.

Pathetic all around.

No justice for the rest of the country, no peace for them!

ww
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"What I don’t understand is why you all want to defend an attack on our capitol."

What I don't understand is why ...you... have never disclaimed any of the attacks on our American cities by radical leftists.

I’ve never discussed any of those events in any detail. There were a number of them in different places at different times. Pick one, or pretend they are all the same, and start a thread.

In the meantime, do you defend the insurrection or do you condemn it?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
“What I don’t understand is why you all want to defend an attack on our capitol.”

++++++++++++++++++++

“Across many cities in the USA was a swarm of chaotic, violent protests, looting, murder and injury that these cities… “

Ok. So, do you defend the insurrection or do you condemn it?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Ok. So, do you defend the insurrection or do you condemn it?

++++++++++++

There was no insurrection just like there were no riots with BLM.

I condemn each, however I see how ongoing toleration and providing tacit approval of the former events (via relative silence and lack of counter action to restore order) leads folks to think to do the same for their cause is fine.

Get to the root cause. Hire new staff, establish what the law is + enforce it and get to work!

ww
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I concede the point. I'm in the Philippines. Is there an easier way to see replies than to go to the reply section? A notification signal somewhere?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
"Ok. So, do you defend the insurrection or do you condemn it?"

++++++++++++

There was no insurrection...

So you defend it then.

...just like there were no riots with BLM.

What do you mean by "with BLM"?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
What do you mean by "with BLM"?

OT:
Every time I see the acronym "BLM", I have to check context to see if it means "Black Lives Matter" or "Bureau of Land Management".


https://www.zmescience.com/science/black-lives-matter-protes...

Overall, the researchers say, violence during these protests was rare, and attempts to portray these protests as overly violent are not backed by actual data. Destruction and violence did happen at some protests, but this was the exception rather than the norm.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/zme-science/
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
What do you mean by "with BLM"?

++++++++++++++++

Does your brain walk with a cane?

ww
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
BLM is a vehicle -- for Liberals, who *don't* care ....to show that they do.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
BLM is a vehicle -- for Liberals, who *don't* care ....to show that they do.

++++++++++++++++

Wow, your post is succinct, easy to understand and says so much more than those few words would suggest. This is very different than the dodge ball most play here with long winded nothingness.

Perhaps your posting will rub off on those here.

ww

...and that is why you are the leader.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
What do you mean by "with BLM"?

++++++++++++++++

Does your brain walk with a cane?

ww


It is a simple question that you don't want to answer. That says it all.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
They've been playing "dodge ball" with this constituency for 50 years.

And sadly, this constituency....has seen the American dream, or even a nice American nap....pass it by.

So yeah, the "Great Fathers" on the Left (I committed one word there).....will shout 'Rittenhouse!' every chance they get. BUT.....

*They have time for mandatory Ethnic Studies in California - but NO discussion on mandatory personal finance education. The Left seem to like their big banks collecting late fees, and charging higher interest rates due to adverse credit.

*Math is now 'racist' so the Great Liberal Fathers wish to dumb it down along with testing .

*If *anyone* mentions culture, and family structure - RACIST! accusations will fly because after all, if babies aren't having babies...that means less poverty, more upward mobility, and less dependency.

All this while in racist America, many "people of color" populate medicine, engineering, science, tech, anything from taxi drivers to more and more S/P 500 CEOs.

If only Liberals could run the country as well as they have run an entire people into the ground.
Print the post Back To Top