- The American Conservative - https://www.theamericanconservative.com -

Trump Disqualifies Himself

This is it. This is the election, right here: [1]

Republican candidate Donald Trump refused to say on Wednesday that he would accept the outcome of the Nov. 8 U.S. presidential election, leaving open the possibility he would challenge the ultimate outcome.

In the third and final presidential debate with Democratic rival Hillary Clinton, Trump said he would wait to decide whether the outcome was legitimate.

“I will tell you at the time, I will keep you in suspense,” Trump said.

The Republican Party’s nominee for the US presidency said on national television, three weeks before the election, that he might not accept its legitimacy.

On no grounds whatsoever. 

Every horrible thing Hillary said tonight, every horrible thing she stands for, every horrible thing her presidency is going to mean for the country and the causes most important to me — all of it is obviated by this statement. A man so vain and so unspeakably reckless cannot be trusted in the White House.

This country is in a hell of a place.

UPDATE: Just FYI, I am traveling this morning, and will only be able to approve comments sporadically.

220 Comments (Open | Close)

220 Comments To "Trump Disqualifies Himself"

#1 Comment By Jerry On October 20, 2016 @ 6:52 pm

It turns out the Trump Foundation paid for O’Keefe’s video:


#2 Comment By KevinS On October 20, 2016 @ 7:00 pm

It seems to me at this point that the debate is over. No one on here who currently supports Trump (or Clinton or Johnson) will change their mind unless there is a black swan event. There is no real point in further discussion. Now we just bide our time until the election. Then the Republican party will need a new autopsy after its third presidential loss in row (this time to a deeply flawed uncharismatic candidate….and probably by a larger margin than Obama had in 2008 and 2012).

If the post-defeat analysis focuses on a “rigged” election, voter fraud and a biased media, Hillary will be two-termer if she wants.

#3 Comment By Anne On October 20, 2016 @ 7:09 pm

Re that Rasmussen poll:

Rasmussen is known to be pro-Republican and a consistent outlier. In 2012, it consistently rated Romney 3.7 pts above Obama, including in its poll just before that election. According to poll reviewer Nate Silver, in the past three months only eight national polls have shown Trump ahead, and half of them were conducted by Rasmussen. Of 23 polls rated for accuracy after the 2012 election, Rasmussen ranked 20th.

#4 Comment By grumpy realist On October 20, 2016 @ 7:16 pm

I wonder if those so wildly waving around the “Veritas” tapes spliced together by James O’Keefe would be willing to have the exact same person provide similar “video evidence” against them in a court case.

You’ve got someone who already has been proven in the court of law to commit illegal activities (not to mention the selective editing), but somehow he provides trustworthy evidence?

It would make a cat laugh.

#5 Comment By In For Life On October 20, 2016 @ 7:37 pm

“You can stop with the whiny defenses people. This is anti-democratic.”

What’s anti-democratic is some corrupt guy’s corrupt, incompetent wife imagining that she’s entitled to be President. When did we turn into Pakistan (or Argentina)?

#6 Comment By Noah Robert Graves On October 20, 2016 @ 7:43 pm

Some refreshing common sense:

#7 Comment By Noreastern On October 20, 2016 @ 9:29 pm

I honestly could not agree more with the author of this article. To call into question the validity of the election process in the US is unforgivable. Trump does not want to be President. He wants to be Dictator. Actually I have come to doubt Trump even wants to win this election.

#8 Comment By WalkingHorse On October 20, 2016 @ 10:45 pm

I have no problem with Trump’s reserving his right to contest the election result. We have ample evidence of malfeasance at the highest levels of government plus the revelations of election fraud which has been the trademark of the democrat party for over a century.

As Reagan counseled, “Trust, but verify.”

#9 Comment By Bill On October 21, 2016 @ 6:42 am

You’re right.

And it’s a dang shame. A great opportunity to correct our course has been squandered. Perhaps never has the public been more ready to reject the political establishment. The only thing that could save them was a candidate as ridiculously unfit for the office as Mr. Trump. And so on it goes.

#10 Comment By midtown On October 21, 2016 @ 7:21 am

Folks like grumpy realist, who “wildly” doubt the Veritas video because it is not raw footage, are not living in, um, reality. There are long sections in which Dem activists talk at length about how to reduce the likelihood of being prosecuted for voter fraud, using those terms themselves. Just for fun, I’d love to hear your alternate-universe explanation for what you think they were innocently talking about. “I made a wonderful risotto yesterday from a recipe given to me by John Podesta and that’s why I start with, how could they prosecute me for voter fraud, and work my way back from there.”

#11 Comment By David J. White On October 21, 2016 @ 9:02 am

My question is, is a de facto economic and political oligarchy, a legitimate form of government for the United States?

What other form of government has the United States ever had, really?

#12 Comment By Matt On October 21, 2016 @ 9:54 am

When Hillary said Bush was ‘selected, not elected’ did it threaten our democracy? Did you criticize her for it in such a fit, Rod?

When John Kerry was whispering about GWB and Diebold and the dodgy Ohio vote in ’04 did it threaten our democracy? Did you criticize him in such a fit, Rod?

Does anyone think Richard Nixon a better man for having NOT contested the ’60 election, when JFK cheated?

Evidence has been provided of Democrat cheating. Its no surprise the day the video emerges the media closes ranks on Donald.

#13 Comment By Timothy Hallinan On October 21, 2016 @ 1:07 pm

This latest comment tears it for me. You have joined in with the left. Calling this magazine “The American Conservative” is a complete falsity. You should rename it “The Formerly American Conservative”.

#14 Comment By RMThoughts On October 21, 2016 @ 1:51 pm

The American ruling Elite has lost the consent of the governed. The establishment is horrified at the Donald’s defiance because, deep within its soul, it fears that the people for whom Trump speaks no longer accept its political legitimacy or moral authority.

#15 Comment By Matt On October 21, 2016 @ 2:10 pm

Rod, heres an example of Clinton Machine cheating in VA, ‘governed’ by Clinton apparathcik Terry McAuliffe. The governor was presented with hundreds of examples of non citizens voting. He responded by stonewalling any further information about them and, in Clintonian fashion, gaslighting the watchdog group.


My question to you is: when you have hard evidence of voter fraud going unprosecuted, why is it wrong for the candidate on the losing end of it to talk about it?

#16 Comment By JonF On October 21, 2016 @ 2:40 pm

Re: why is it wrong for the candidate on the losing end of it to talk about it?

He can certainly talk about, But concluding that a few hundred votes is going to “rig” an election that is likely to be won by many, many, many times that number of votes is well beyond “Sore Loserman” territory. (I am doing the favor here of assuming that the “evidence” presented in that rightwing zine is genuine, not faked or a lot of innuendo, or too inclusive to prosecute)

#17 Comment By Matt On October 21, 2016 @ 4:22 pm

JonF, dont do me any favors. Read the detailed report here. Its a 5mb PDF download.


And drop the oily Democrat sanctimony over our election process if your willing to
overlook a few hundred known instances of cheating. Each one is a felony.
In VA, the Attorney Generals race was decided by less than that. They found that many
instances of non citizens with previous voting records in just one county in VA.

#18 Comment By Matt On October 21, 2016 @ 4:53 pm

Finally, I challenge anyone to present a sane, rational scenario where a candidate can steal the election. Start with how that candidate can “rig” the election in enough states to win the electoral college vote. Pay attention to how the state governments all run their own election processes, and how a current majority of the states are controlled by the Republican Party.

Franklin, i’ll concede your long history here of writing thoughtful comments, as opposed to my occasionally hot-headed remarks,
but this kinda bugs me. It seems to me you are moving the goalposts. Democrats (not saying you are one)
go on and on about Voter ID laws -“there is no voter fraud”. And then Republicans demonstrate it (see my 4.22 comment),
and Democrats respond “its minor. Not enough to change anything”

Well, why are Scott Foval and Robert Creamer trying so hard if it doesnt accomplish anything? And why wont Democrat officals
prosecute when they are presented with clear evidence, names and times of fraudsters, etc, as has happened in Virginia, if they are so
sacrosanct about our election process?

Further, Mcaullife by a wave of his hand restored blanket clemency to convicted felons in VA. The state supreme
court threw it out because they needed to be indvidually reviewed and handsigned. So what did he do, setup a rubber stamp
and had someone stamp them all day long, every day. When someone called him on it, he said they were racist and against democracy. No one brought up race but him. He assumed felons were non-white, and Democrats.

#19 Comment By Franklin Evans On October 24, 2016 @ 5:29 pm

Matt, I offer the same respect to you, but there can be only one standard here, and that’s court-produced documentation. The link you provided is propaganda — a valid thing, I do assert — but it gives thin evidence and is thick with conclusions.

It’s just not enough. The organizations you cite need the credibility of court proceedings. They can complain all they want, but without the evidence they get rightly panned as conspiracy theorists.

#20 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On October 27, 2016 @ 10:03 pm

He assumed felons were non-white, and Democrats.

If McAuliffe assumed that, he has a surprise coming. Because they’re not. But, as a proud resident of a state where voting rights are automatically restored to felons once they complete all terms of their sentence, including probation and parole, I applaud Gov. McAuliffe’s action as simple justice.

As someone who has worked at the polls for many years, I can assure you that voter fraud is darn near impossible, with or without a photo ID requirement. The most effective forms of electoral rigging in American history are:

1) Rounding up bowery bums and marching them to the polls, with a promise of a quart of bourbon and a few dollars after they vote the straight party ticket, with a ward heeler going with them to watch.

2) Registering dead people en masse, and then having party operatives vote these lines.

3) The “Thin Pencil Louie” method, also used in many parishes in Louisiana circa 1896, which is to ignore the ballots and just write in the preferred outcome.

None of these are feasible with the current number and diversity of poll workers, the opportunities for observation, and the manner in which the poll books are kept. (In may state, two identical books).

As far as I can tell from the very fuzzy reporting of O’Keefe’s paid assignment from the Trump Foundation, he Interviewed people who were boasting about their work disrupting opposition rallies, which is despicable, but not evidence of actual voter fraud. Busing people to a rally is simple enough. Busing people to a polling station and getting them in the books? Not hardly. If the interviewees said that, they are delusional.