• 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.

Trump's Coup d'état.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lurch said:
You have an inflated notion of what the military's role is in politics. They'll not unilaterally get involved or take any action, if the oaths taken by its members is adhered to.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's the problem with that whole question what about the military backing for a coup. It's irrelevant. It won't happen and that's not the path for a coup. However, what the military will also no do is do anything to stop a coup.
 
eerok said:
Anyway, as for the design of the American government in general, I think there are protections built in, even for a rogue jackass like Trump. I think that the Executive is not sufficient in itself to seize control of the country. They need the election, and it seems as if they can't overturn it.
Click to expand...

Nonsense! We have an evildoer who oozes incompetence. We have >100000 Americans dead due to negligent homicide and a crashed economy. We have a Republican party that will go along with him if it seems like that's what it takes to keep power but who actually don't really like him that much. We have 306 electoral votes against and 6 million more Americans voting against him than for him.

Make any of it more favorable to the wannabe autocrat and what we have seen is showing us that our so called protections will not hold.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
We might be able to sell off the wall, piece by piece, to get some money back.
Click to expand...

What has been built when it comes to an actual barriers in a place where none existed before? Isn't it something like 10 miles? Hasn't most of the construction been replacement, repair or maintenance of already built barriers?
 
Roger Ramjets said:
Perhaps - but only if she's hot.

It's a well-known fact that woman are attracted to rapey men, which is why more of them voted for Trump than Hillary. To counter that the GOP needs someone who will attract more white males (the demographic that was most turned off by Trump). She should also be Black, Latino or Asian, since those are the demographics that are leaning more conservative these days (and their racism make them less likely to support outsiders). I would totally vote for an Asian hottie!
Click to expand...

Would half south-Asian work for you? Or do you need full south-Asian?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
It didn't stop him voting for Barrett. Doesn't mean it didn't turn some voters off. Right now I'd love to see a Lincoln Project like ad for the 2 Senate seats in Georgia: Vote for 2 Senators that aren't in the cult. :)

It also might make for some ads in 2022.

Did it disgust you or not?
Click to expand...

I wonder about this. Do we have any evidence that the Lincoln Project were successful in any way? In particular whether the influence they had was in any way matching the amount of money they spent.

My understanding is that they claim to represent Republicans fed up with the party under Trump, but did they actually manage to sway any Republicans?
 
Last edited:
Interesting comment on MSNBC today, Graham's calls to the four states was a federal offense, interfering with election results. Could be the State Republicans knew they would not be legally protected if they had tampered with legitimate votes and/or falsely certified election results. The guys from MI who took Trump up on a free trip and tour of the WH may very well have had legit legal advisors as opposed to the federal GOP legislators who have Barr to rely on.

In 60 days there will be a new AG, not one deep up Trump's ass. Graham had better hope the new AG doesn't come after him.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Oh, Trump's behaviour may have backfired for the GOP. Distrust in the election results has led to Trump supporters vowing to "destroy" the GOP for going along with the narrative that Biden won, calling prominent Republican politicians "traitors", and vowing to boycott the run-off elections in Georgia

So the GOP may have lost Trump's base (or, at least, that portion of it that attends protests and/or uses Parler), and in doing so lost themselves the Senate.
Click to expand...

I dunno. I’ll believe it when I see it.
 
angrysoba said:
I dunno. I’ll believe it when I see it.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Republicans often fall in line. In 2016, the Republican Party was supposed to be fragmented, but they held their nose and voted for Trump. That said, I hope these supporters are true to their word.
 
Fall in line with who, though? The problem with a cult of personality is that it's the personality that's important, not the rest of the cult.

I mean, I'm not claiming it will happen, but it's definitely the noises that are being made in some of the more extreme ends of the fandom.
 
Cain said:
Indeed. Republicans often fall in line. In 2016, the Republican Party was supposed to be fragmented, but they held their nose and voted for Trump. That said, I hope these supporters are true to their word.
Click to expand...

If you can't trust a Trump supporter....:jaw-dropp
 
angrysoba said:
I wonder about this. Do we have any evidence that the Lincoln Project were successful in any way? In particular whether the influence they had was in any way matching the amount of money they spent.

My understanding is that they claim to represent Republicans fed up with the party under Trump, but did they actually manage to sway any Republicans?
Click to expand...

I subscribe to their podcast.

Their ads were quite targeted to swing states and more narrowly to swing districts. To hear them tell it, it was successful. But hard core “evidence” of that might be difficult for them to produce. The majority of voters had their minds made up before their ads ran, but it’s not unreasonable to think well crafted ads may have resonated with a few wavering Republicans, and a tiny percentage swing there could have mattered.
 
Last edited:
Fast Eddie B said:
I subscribe to their podcast.

Their ads were quite targeted to swing states and more narrowly to swing districts. To hear them tell it, it was successful. But hard core “evidence” of that might be difficult for them to produce. The majority of voters had their minds made up before their ads ran, but it’s not unreasonable to think well crafted ads may have resonated with a few wavering Republicans, and a tiny percentage swing there could have mattered.
Click to expand...

I don't find any value in a political campaigner telling me their campaigns are successful. If they weren't they get no funding, so clearly it's in their interest to say they are effective, but their word is meaningless without any objective stats.
 
Cain said:
Indeed. Republicans often fall in line. In 2016, the Republican Party was supposed to be fragmented, but they held their nose and voted for Trump. That said, I hope these supporters are true to their word.
Click to expand...
I think many thought they could pretty much control him once he was elected. I doubt many of them realised how unwell he was and how stupid and willfully ignorant he is.
 
Darat said:
I think many thought they could pretty much control him once he was elected. I doubt many of them realised how unwell he was and how stupid and willfully ignorant he is.
Click to expand...

If you're talking about 2016, I think most of them believed he would never be elected so they could just go back to "normal" candidates. The genie that they let out of the bottle is that the Sarah Palin-Donald Trump wing of the party is bigger and more appealing than they realized. This came as a big shock to the non-lunatic fringe of the party.
 
Democrats think the Republicans are going to start infighting and eating their own young because that's why they always do.

The Republican goal is power, not internal consistency of standards. That's why the Democrat strategy of going "Well everything is so broken now the Republicans are going to stop being so cohesive is going to happen.... no.... no wait now... any minute now... yep any minute now" never actually comes true.

Trump is not going to guilt or break the GOP.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
Did it disgust you or not?
Click to expand...

The Graham move?

Honestly and sadly, the last four years raised my bar for 'getting disgusted'. So many unthinkable thinks are getting normalized.
I am getting used to stuff, I am getting used to see more people acting more crazy and more brazen.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Democrats think the Republicans are going to start infighting and eating their own young because that's why they always do.

The Republican goal is power, not internal consistency of standards.
Click to expand...

Yeah, there's this idea that there are the smiley nice respectable Republicans (Marco Rubio, Susan Collins, Mitt Romney and frankly John McCain), and then there are the craazy uncle Republicans (Donald Trump, Rudy Guiliani, Mitch McConnell and Lindsay Graham, and Ted Cruz and Chris Christie). Look at how they all bickered and insulted each other and then came together anyway. The smiley ones just made their silly simpering smiles and said, "Sure, my uncle's totally crazy and I'm not on board, but hey, he's my uncle so whaddayagonnado?"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom