No Republican president since Eisenhower has been legitimately elected, says Thom Hartmann

[chknltl]

53. Am I to understand your issue here is based only on the word legitimate?

I understand that cheaters oftentimes win and yet one could still say that they 'legitimately' won because they did in fact win.

Thom Hartmann points out to his listeners and readers that there has been some pretty substantial cheating going on by those on the right. This cheating was of a type and magnitude he 'believes' that the American voter would NOT have put up with in any of the referred to elections had they only known about it.

I agree with Thom in that I too 'believe' that had the American voter seen the very facts and data-the cheating, those elections would have turned out differently.

So in truth one can say that every President since Washington has indeed won the posting 'legitimately' but arguably not all of them have won through means the American electorate would have allowed had they but known.

Is it one of these two points where you are in disagreement with Thom on? Do you disagree with his use of the word 'legitimately' or is it that you disagree with his, (and my), 'assumption' that the American electorate would have in any or all of the cases referred too NOT put up with the cheating. OR is there an entirely different aspect to all of this that you disagree with?