• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: 2020 Presidential Election part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
I won't disagree. I'm pretty ambivalent about it.

I don't have strong feelings about it one way or another. They're short posts, easy to skip over with no impact. And they're usually on-topic. I'd prefer a bit of commentary or a link with them, but at the end of the day, they're just not a big deal.

It's up there with tapatalk sigs. Mildly annoying sometimes, but easy to move past. I don't understand why anyone would get actually peeved about them.
 
This right here. It's a little disingenuous to say "oh, Trump's lost, he'll be gone in a couple of months, so what difference does it make?" It's the way he's losing, and the way the GOP largely is enabling that, that makes a difference. Trump isn't, AFAICT, doing anything he doesn't have a strict right to do. But Republicans over the last few years have made an absolute fetish of doing things they have a technical right to do without any consideration for whether those things are the right thing to do. Blocking Obama's SC pick in '16, ramming through their own this year (even when they had to directly contradict their stance from four years earlier to do so), and now demanding recounts that won't realistically make any difference and "investigations" that are really nothing more than specious and unfounded placeholders for riling their base and (probably) making money off the rubes...all these things make a compete hash of our democracy. How is any citizen ever going to be able to have confidence in the integrity of the process- which the GOP claims is their primary reason for wanting the recounts/investigations- when any future loser of an election has only to cite this one as precedent for throwing shade on that process for his case?

This way. 4,640,688
 
This right here. It's a little disingenuous to say "oh, Trump's lost, he'll be gone in a couple of months, so what difference does it make?" It's the way he's losing, and the way the GOP largely is enabling that, that makes a difference. Trump isn't, AFAICT, doing anything he doesn't have a strict right to do. But Republicans over the last few years have made an absolute fetish of doing things they have a technical right to do without any consideration for whether those things are the right thing to do. Blocking Obama's SC pick in '16, ramming through their own this year (even when they had to directly contradict their stance from four years earlier to do so), and now demanding recounts that won't realistically make any difference and "investigations" that are really nothing more than specious and unfounded placeholders for riling their base and (probably) making money off the rubes...all these things make a compete hash of our democracy. How is any citizen ever going to be able to have confidence in the integrity of the process- which the GOP claims is their primary reason for wanting the recounts/investigations- when any future loser of an election has only to cite this one as precedent for throwing shade on that process for his case?

And this is the problem with calling for the Democratic party to play the Republicans at their own game, there is no game any more. The Republicans will cheerfully burn down the entire system for the least bit of short term advantage. If the Democrats copy their playbook that's pretty much 'the end' for the institutions of Democracy in the USA.
 
Its a mistake to be too charitable to a guy who has a lifetime history of malicious cheating in virtually every other facet of his life.
 
For example - you say he's actively trying to *steal* the election. You've already made your decision that he has lost the election (which I agree with) and that he is aware of and believes that he lost the election (which I disagree with to a degree) and furthermore that he is actively and with malice intentionally trying to cheat (which I disagree with). There's a lot of assumed motivations and mind-reading in there.
It's not mind-reading. Trump stated outright that he would not accept any outcome where he was not the winner. He is claiming election fraud with no evidence, and trying to get the courts to interfere in the vote counting. This is a straight up attempt to steal the election.

And we shouldn't be surprised, because he has used similar tactics in his private business dealings. He is an inveterate liar and fraudster who has (mostly) gotten away with it so far. IOW, he has form. We don't need to read his mind to know what he is doing.
 
Some very few idiots might want him to become dictator... but most conservatives (and Republicans even) are actually pretty big on personal liberty and the preservation of the constitution.
Uh, no they aren't.

They may claim they like their freedoms when it comes to gun rights, taxes, etc. But those freedoms never seem to extend to things like free speech (in particular pr0n), abortion rights, drug laws, etc.

I'm not saying that Liberals/progressives don't also have their own set of acceptable freedoms/restrictions, but its wrong to think that Conservatives are actually big on liberty.

And of course, for many, power trumps a desire for freedom.
There's nowhere near enough people that want Trump to be dictator for it to have a chance in hell of occurring.
The risk isn't that they would come outright and say "we want a Trump dictatorship"... its that they would engage in their regular dirty tricks (voter suppression, gerrymandering, conspiring with foreign governments), in an attempt to maintain Republican power, and since Trump is at the top he would benefit.
And that's all assuming that Trump actually genuinely wants to be a dictator.
He has certainly shown an authoritarian streak... an unwillingness to compromise, use dirty tricks (e.g. foreign influence) to rig an election, etc. Does that mean 'dictatorship'? Well, its uncomfortably close for some.
I am so completely tired of all of this. Not you specifically, just the entire topic. It's been four years of non-stop fearmongering about the horrible evil things that Trump is certain to do. And whenever one of them doesn't happen, a new terror is simply inserted and the manufactured outrage continues unabated.
He has: called neo-nazis "fine people", had children locked in cages, wasted billions to build a useless wall (taking money from the military to do so), allowed disease to spread unchecked in the U.S., driven up the deficit in order to give tax breaks to millionaires, and set back the U.S. in handling the environment.

I think people have a reason to be outraged.

In the 2016 election, we thought Trump would be a disaster economically. Well, the deficit increased under him, and job growth slowed.

We thought Trump would be a disaster for the environment, and he has rolled back environmental regulations.

We thought he would enable racism, and sure enough, kids are locked in cages.

We knew the wall would be a big boondoggle, and it is.

About the biggest fear that people had that wasn't realized is that Trump might start a war (which he hasn't... yet)... But his incompetence almost started a conflict with Iran, and it destabilized parts of Syria/Iraq.
Trump lost the election. Who the **** gives a crap what he says or what he wants anymore? Just sit back and be happy that Biden won, and let it go.
Because Trump is still president until the new year, and can do substantial damage until Biden takes office.

Because Trump has to work with the incoming administration during the transition, and if he is acting like a toddler, that's not going to work well.
 
Oh yes the "Let's stop the discussion and list all the things Trump has done because I'm going to pretend I've forgotten them and make you repeat them all just to waste your time" stage of the discussion.

Wait water is wet? When was this established? I demand the discussion stop and everyone prove to me yet again that water is wet so I can forget it again in 10 minutes.
 
Trump lost Pennsylvania by more than 45,000 votes, but this tweet is a good reminder that he'd totally do a coup to stay in power if he could
Quote Tweet

@Donald J. Trump
Pennsylvania Party Leadership votes are this week. I hope they pick very tough and smart fighters. We will WIN!!
 
Oh yes the "Let's stop the discussion and list all the things Trump has done because I'm going to pretend I've forgotten them and make you repeat them all just to waste your time" stage of the discussion.

Wait water is wet? When was this established? I demand the discussion stop and everyone prove to me yet again that water is wet so I can forget it again in 10 minutes.

When someone tells you who they are, believe them.
 
I wish it was that easy. I know my history too well. Coups have been started on less. The Republicans are unwilling to say that he lost. 70 million Americans voted for Trump. And I still see idiots parading around with guns and Trump signs. Trump appointees are preventing the transfer of power. Trump fired the SECDEF and replaced him with a toadie. The AG has ordered investigations (well sort of) into the election. SCOTUS at this very moment is hearing Trump's appeal. That they are even considering it and not rejecting it out of hand is a bit troubling.

This will all crumble in the next couple of days or it's going to get ugly.

I personally think it's most likely to crumble...but I still worry.

Stop worrying. It'll lead you to an early grave.

Coups have been started with less... in situations where the military was under direct control of the person in charge and supported that person's coup. Despite a lot of the Hollywood-driven narrative around military personnel, that's not going to happen in the US. The president is titularly Commander in Chief, but the oaths of the military are to the Office of the President (not the individual) and first and foremost to uphold the Constitution. And the vast, overwhelming majority of active duty military, especially high ranking officers, take that oath very, very seriously.

Republicans are unwilling to say he lost. Well, duh. Of course they are. A lot Democrats spent most of 2017 spinning that Trump wasn't "their" president, or that he wasn't a "legitimate" president, and pretty much trying to have him removed from office from before he even officially took office. That's the price of a FPTP system that has devolved into two-party loggerheads. That divide has been widening through my entire lifetime. It's in the interests of the party to exhaust every possible avenue of challenge before conceding defeat. In most elections, it hasn't been quite so close. I mean, the popular vote isn't close, and the EC count as it stands isn't close... but the votes within several states are really close. Several of the states that Biden took at the end were within 1% difference. I think it's unlikely, but I can see the game theory behind challenging them - it's hypothetically possible that one or more of them could flip on recount or on challenged ballots. Like I said, I don't think it's likely, but I would fully expect a Democrat in the same situation to challenge wherever possible.

70 million people voted for Trump. Yup. But it's not like all 70M of them actually *like* him. Many don't. Many are old-school Republican, and even if the current Republicans don't represent those old-schoolers, they do a better job of it than Democrats do. There are some fundamental divides in the US, that aren't being well addressed by our government. I don't expect that divide to lessen until someone in power actually starts doing their job for ALL of the people of the US, irrespective of the parties involved.
 
Trump lost Pennsylvania by more than 45,000 votes, but this tweet is a good reminder that he'd totally do a coup to stay in power if he could
Quote Tweet

@Donald J. Trump
Pennsylvania Party Leadership votes are this week. I hope they pick very tough and smart fighters. We will WIN!!

He also lost the national election by 100 times that.
 
I'm 90 percent sure PA has had absentee mail in ballots for a long time. The only difference in this election, the state mailed ballots to all registered voters and not just citizens that requested them.

That's what I was trying to get at. It's a change in the overall dynamic for PA, which could very reasonably lead to a difference in voting patterns. For states where mail-in are the default(ish), I wouldn't expect to see a difference in voting pattern.
 
This could be a whole 'nother thread.

First off, there's a lot of interpretation and spin involved in some of this. I understand that this is your perspective, and that's fine. But there's still opinion involved.

For example - you say he's actively trying to *steal* the election. You've already made your decision that he has lost the election (which I agree with) and that he is aware of and believes that he lost the election (which I disagree with to a degree) and furthermore that he is actively and with malice intentionally trying to cheat (which I disagree with). There's a lot of assumed motivations and mind-reading in there.

On the other side of things, however, Trump supporters might genuinely believe that there are ballot shenanigans going on, and that Biden cheated. I don't believe that, but my lack of belief doesn't invalidate their belief. And I'm inclined to think that Trump 1) genuinely believes that there has been voter fraud or manipulation in this election, in part because 2) he desperately needs to believe that he didn't lose.

This presents a situation where Trump can hold irrational beliefs, act in ways that are not in the interest of the US... but still not be doing it via malice.

Pretty much all of the other things you listed fall into very similar patterns. Everyone might agree on the observable objective facts (ok, well 99% of people, because some are insane)... but that doesn't mean that everyone will filter them through the same belief structure, or that everyone will assume the same motivations for those facts.

That's the thing that has bothered me most over the past four years - the sheer volume of unabashed mind-reading going on among self-styled skeptics. People assume they know the motivation and the state of Trump's mind, and then somehow become incapable of acknowledging that they're making assumptions and speculations, as well as becoming unable to consider any other possible motivation at all.

One point that is clear: any time an argument depends on a premise regarding Trump's beliefs, we're on shaky ground. We all agree that Trump lies, I reckon, but it also seems that he is capable of believing whatever is beneficial at the moment.

For all I know, he looked at the crowd at his inauguration and decided it was massive, undoubtedly the most massive ever seen. On the other hand, when he or an aide took a sharpie to the NOAA map, there's no reasonable description other than intentional deception.
 
It's not mind-reading. Trump stated outright that he would not accept any outcome where he was not the winner. He is claiming election fraud with no evidence, and trying to get the courts to interfere in the vote counting. This is a straight up attempt to steal the election.

And we shouldn't be surprised, because he has used similar tactics in his private business dealings. He is an inveterate liar and fraudster who has (mostly) gotten away with it so far. IOW, he has form. We don't need to read his mind to know what he is doing.

Do you have a source for the highlighted? Prefereably one with context? My recollection (which could very well be faulty) is that he said he wouldn't accept it without making sure it was legitimate.
 
I don't know guys, maybe we have just been overreacting over these four last years? I mean, it's not like he actually did any of the bad things we thought he might?

Only he did. As well as plenty of bad things we never even imagined he would. I don't understand how Emily's Cat can claim with a straight face to be tired of overreactions. In fact, I don't believe Emily's Cat is doing it with a straight face.
 
That's what I was trying to get at. It's a change in the overall dynamic for PA, which could very reasonably lead to a difference in voting patterns. For states where mail-in are the default(ish), I wouldn't expect to see a difference in voting pattern.

AZ has had mail-in voting for 26 (I think) years. It flipped this time around.
 
One point that is clear: any time an argument depends on a premise regarding Trump's beliefs, we're on shaky ground. We all agree that Trump lies, I reckon, but it also seems that he is capable of believing whatever is beneficial at the moment.

For all I know, he looked at the crowd at his inauguration and decided it was massive, undoubtedly the most massive ever seen. On the other hand, when he or an aide took a sharpie to the NOAA map, there's no reasonable description other than intentional deception.

That's much more concise than what I said.
 
“There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration.”

Pompeo today.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom