• 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.
Firestone said:
The concurring statement by Justice Wecht is worth a read:

(bodling mine)
Click to expand...

So, I'm not a lawyer. I was an immigration officer and adjudications officer for the Immigration and Naturalization Service. In that capacity I read a LOT of precedent decisions. Immigration law tends to be very vague and courts have been forced to fill in a lot of the gaps. When adjudicating applications for immigration benefits (I mostly did cases of suspected marriage fraud) you have to read and apply your governing circuit court decisions.

Judges, never write like this. They just don't. There's a basic assumption that both parties are acting in good faith and within the bounds of ethics for the legal profession. Decisions tend to be very precise legal determinations written in very disciplined language. These judges were venting their spleens.

This decision wasn't written for a respected member of the legal profession doing his/her utmost to protect a client's interest. This is a pretty stunning rebuke.
 
Craig4 said:
So, I'm not a lawyer. I was an immigration officer and adjudications officer for the Immigration and Naturalization Service. In that capacity I read a LOT of precedent decisions. Immigration law tends to be very vague and courts have been forced to fill in a lot of the gaps. When adjudicating applications for immigration benefits (I mostly did cases of suspected marriage fraud) you have to read and apply your governing circuit court decisions.

Judges, never write like this. They just don't. There's a basic assumption that both parties are acting in good faith and within the bounds of ethics for the legal profession. Decisions tend to be very precise legal determinations written in very disciplined language. These judges were venting their spleens.

This decision wasn't written for a respected member of the legal profession doing his/her utmost to protect a client's interest. This is a pretty stunning rebuke.
Click to expand...
(bolding mine)

Indeed, same for the other decisions in PA this week.

But I can understand them. These Trump and Republican cases are egregious, with a staggering dis-proportionality between the claims and the requested relief.
I'm not aware of any similar cases in any Western democracy in our times.
 
Last edited:
Aridas said:
It's an important issue, but not the only one, by far. This goes back to your oft repeated complaint, though. Democrats are generally bad at messaging in comparison to Republicans. In the end, the pandemic was a good reason to vote against Trump, but I didn't get the impression that it was used all that well to make the issue actually pro-Biden or more generally pro-Democrat. Same for a lot else, really. Biden was sold strongly as... a decent guy. That, in reality, is incredibly tepid as a pro-Biden thing. Biden, policy-wise, was vastly better in pretty much every way. Policy was never all that much of a focus for the campaigning, though, which let the GOP try nearly unimpeded to shape the conversation about what Biden would actually push.
Click to expand...

The modern GOP has never let actual facts, stated goals, or legislative history of a candidate get in the way of their "shaping the conversation about what [any Democratic candidate] would actually push." There is nothing the Dems could do or say to prevent the modern GOP shrieking about every Dem being a "radical liberal" no matter how centrist, tepid, or bland that candidate really is. Falling into the trap of blaming the Dems for what the Reps say about them is foolish and dangerous.
 
Dinesh D'Souza tweeted

@DineshDSouza
Biden “won” in the same way that Lance Armstrong “won.” Yes, Armstrong crossed the finish line first. But his victory was bogus because he cheated. That’s what we’re saying about Biden. He cheated—and we’re going to try and prove this in court
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Dinesh D'Souza tweeted

@DineshDSouza
Biden “won” in the same way that Lance Armstrong “won.” Yes, Armstrong crossed the finish line first. But his victory was bogus because he cheated. That’s what we’re saying about Biden. He cheated—and we’re going to try and prove this in court
Click to expand...

You can try, little convicted felon, but you need actual evidence.

And you are the last person on Earth who has a right to complain about someone cheating.
 
A noted change in language.

"We are going to TRY and prove this in court".

From " We WILL (do action) " used in other messages.
Reality is known if not being respected.
 
8enotto said:
A noted change in language.

"We are going to TRY and prove this in court".

From " We WILL (do action) " used in other messages.
Reality is known if not being respected.
Click to expand...



Hopefully we'll soon be at the point where he starts saying "We are going to FAIL to prove this in court".
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Like I said, McConnell will back Trump as long as he thinks Trump can help keep those last 2 Senate seats in GOP hands.

After that, it will be interesting to see which Republicans change their POVs.

But just like the TEA Party took over the GOP first, the Trump Party is still the look of the party. Trump has so much of a donation draw, the next couple years will be interesting.
Click to expand...

The overlap between the Trumpists and the mainstream GOP is considerable. The Trumpists will be brought inside as were the Tea Party and as will QAnon.

The fact is that President Trump represents the modern day GOP, not because he has hijacked it, but because 90% of the GOP agree with what he says and does.
 
Meadmaker said:
The author completely misses the point of what happened. He is right that Joe Biden was uninspiring, and didn't do much of anything to get out the vote.

This election was all about Trump. I kind of like Joe Biden. He's not awful, but he's way too old to take on the Presidency. However, he has one characteristic that made him very, very, appealing.

He is not Donald Trump.

Donald Trump inspired millions of new voters who had never voted before to come out and vote. The problem is that he inspired more people to vote against him than to vote for him.

Read a George Will column for Pete's sake. George Will. Recognize that name? All my life, a Republican columnist, until 2016...or was it 2017 that he made it official. I don't remember. There are lots of people like George Will who are staunch conservatives, and solid Republicans, who would never under any circumstances vote for Donald Trump, and in many cases would do anything they could to get rid of him.

Trump's negatives were just too high to win re-election.

And we are not told that Joe Biden won, we counted the votes. Joe had more or them.
Click to expand...

Yep, probably Biden was perfectly aware that one of his most powerful political assets was the fact that he wasn't Donald Trump.

Probably one of Trump's most powerful political assets in 2016 was that he wasn't Hillary Clinton. I worked next to a Trump voter for more than a year (really nice guy, in case anyone was wondering) and he didn't talk about Trump much. But he sure hated Hillary Clinton.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Yes some do. This is from your link::rolleyes:
Not exactly an army and it's not one that might appeal to a lot of people.
Click to expand...
That "not masturbate" thing is actually clever, even if they do not know about it themself. It will increase aggression and stress levels, making Proud Boys more prone to violence.

In general, you dismiss these movements at your peril.

Delvo said:
This election was a failure for Democrats in every way except the fact that Trump lost.
Click to expand...

You are almost as bad as Trump. Bernie lost primaries many, many months ago. GET OVER IT.
 
wareyin said:
The modern GOP has never let actual facts, stated goals, or legislative history of a candidate get in the way of their "shaping the conversation about what [any Democratic candidate] would actually push." There is nothing the Dems could do or say to prevent the modern GOP shrieking about every Dem being a "radical liberal" no matter how centrist, tepid, or bland that candidate really is. Falling into the trap of blaming the Dems for what the Reps say about them is foolish and dangerous.
Click to expand...

To be clear, I'm not blaming the Dems for what the Reps say about them. What blame there is on the Dems there is that the Dems didn't manage to say so much about what the Dems actually push compared to the Republican lies about what they push. That's hardly only the Dems fault, especially when it comes to how the MSM and social media work, but when a huge part of the actual campaign strategy for Biden was "Biden's a 'decent' guy," that is little more than "Biden's not Trump." That's not really a ringing endorsement of Biden or the Democrats, nor, normally, reason to get all that enthusiastic.
 
Last edited:
'Biden is not Trump' was pretty much the only message that could cut through normal and right-wing media alike.

When Fox and the like could tear down Obamacare by confusing people into thinking it's something other than the ACA, there is nothing Dems can do to set things straight: only emotions matter.
 
Aridas said:
To be clear, I'm not blaming the Dems for what the Reps say about them. What blame there is on the Dems there is that the Dems didn't manage to say so much about what the Dems actually push compared to the Republican lies about what they push.
Click to expand...

That’s quite the dilemma.

It might have seemed like a good idea for Biden to have a press conference where he clearly laid out why he was NOT in any way a socialist. But knowing human psychology, it would have probably just cemented the false narrative that he WAS a socialist - why else would he spend so much time talking about it? Same for “open borders” or “destroying the suburbs” or “hurting God”. I think that’s why “The Big Lie” works as well as it does.
 
Trending WP article
On the afternoon of Nov. 13, a Friday, Trump called Giuliani from the Oval Office while other advisers were present, including Vice President Pence; White House counsel Pat Cipollone; Johnny McEntee, the director of presidential personnel; and Clark.

Giuliani, who was on speakerphone, told the president that he could win and that his other advisers were lying to him about his chances. Clark called Giuliani an expletive and said he was feeding the president bad information. The meeting ended without a clear path, according to people familiar with the discussion.

The next day, a Saturday, Trump tweeted out that Giuliani, Ellis, Powell and others were now in charge of his legal strategy. Ellis startled aides by entering the campaign’s Arlington headquarters and instructing staffers that they must now listen to her and Giuliani.

“They came in one day and were like, ‘We have the president’s direct order. Don’t take an order if it doesn’t come from us,’ ” a senior administration official recalled.

Clark and Miller pushed back, the official said. Ellis threatened to call Trump, to which Miller replied, “Sure, let’s do this,” said a campaign adviser.

It was a fiery altercation, not unlike the many that had played out over the past four years in the corridors of the West Wing. The outcome was that Giuliani and Ellis, as well as Powell — the “elite strike force,” as they dubbed themselves — became the faces of the president’s increasingly unrealistic attempts to subvert democracy.

The strategy, according to a second senior administration official, was, “Anyone who is willing to go out and say, ‘They stole it,’ roll them out. Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, Sidney Powell. Send [former acting director of national intelligence] Ric Grenell out West. Send [American Conservative Union Chairman] Matt Schlapp somewhere. Just roll everybody up who is willing to do it into a clown car, and when it’s time for a press conference, roll them out.”
Click to expand...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...ps-quest-to-overturn-the-election/ar-BB1bs02h
 
When one side lies and enough people believe them, what are you going to do? Hire better PR people? Tell the believers that they are schmucks? It's not like there's a straightforward way to tackle this, but everyone's always so smart about how things should've been done.
 
Olmstead said:
When one side lies and enough people believe them, what are you going to do? Hire better PR people? Tell the believers that they are schmucks? It's not like there's a straightforward way to tackle this, but everyone's always so smart about how things should've been done.
Click to expand...

Judging from history, this kind of thing is quite often resolved with violence.

I can only hope fate of republicans will be like fate of nazis (those that survived anyway). You know, those old nazi farts living their last days in Germany and talking in pub how even Hitler could not do anything against Jewish menace, holocaust didn't happen and they deserved that nonexistent holocaust anyway.

But between now and this distant future there will be a lot of suffering. Republican dystopia justifies the means, after all.
 
Last edited:
Resume said:
I hope Trump Baby makes it to the Biden inauguration.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ. Right now we can say stuff in relief and hope it's over, but from then on, it should back to maturity and honorable conduct. The world has had all the crap it needs for a long time to come.

Either Trump shows up in person and behaves himself, or he is out and forgotten.

Hans
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom