Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VII (threadbanned users listed in OP)

Foxtrol

Even the ghost of Reagan is taking shots at Trump now

https://twitter.com/MeidasTouch/status/1268593181760688129?s=20

Headshot

Trump turning the White House into Fort Knox, unbelievable all the barriers going up just to protect from peaceful protests

listermint

Headshot wrote: »

Trump turning the White House into Fort Knox, unbelievable all the barriers going up just to protect from peaceful protests

It's absolutely excellent. A huge endictment of where the us is now.

He's gone in Nov.

gormdubhgorm

Carfacemandog wrote: »

It seems quite telling that you have avoided answering if you think Trumps ex secretary of defense, who Trump himself appointed, was being 'hysterical' when he compared Trump to Hitler yesterday.

Maybe you just missed it though, so I'll ask again if you think he was.

Ok he is an Ex Secretary of Defense

And it is important to consider he was involved in both in Iraq and Afganistan.
He was quoted as saying in Afganistan:

"be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet"

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/07/16-most-hair-raising-general-mattis-quotes/340553/

This is the same fella who bombed a wedding party in Iraq in 2004 resulting deaths of 42 civilians, including 11 women and 14 children.

His comments after proof was shown what he and his men did?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/may/21/iraq.rorymccarthy

"I have not seen the pictures but bad things happen in wars. I don't have to apologise for the conduct of my men."


--

As for Mattis' comments about comparing Trump's protest response to Nazi tactics.
I think there are two reasons for this.

1) He his hurt over being fired by Trump

2) He may see an opportunity of running for political office again when Trump's tenure comes to an end. Maybe even do a Dwight Eisenhower?

gormdubhgorm

timsey tiger wrote: »

So your prejudged the ideas based on the history of the person delivering it and inexplicably are telling everybody that, thats what you normally do. I hope you never end up on a jury.

https://libguides.colostate.edu/howtodo/evaluatejournals

The author clearly has biases. When evaluating any article it is important to look at the background of the author and thier qualifications and so on. Who is the author's audience and so on. It can hardly be described as objective.

moon2

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

" Law and order, for this president, simply means that he and his ideological allies are above the law, while others, such as Floyd, are merely subject to it."


This ignores the fact that Police Officer Derek Chauvin has been charged with murder and is due to appear in court on June 8.

These aren't mutually exclusive. Trumps idea of law and order can be exactly as described, and that doesn't preclude Chauvin from being charged with murder.

Chauvin could be found innocent or guilty and that still wouldn't impact Trump's beliefs. Trumps actions and words since the murder of Floyd are objectively a far cry from law abiding, or even constitution abiding.

Hurrache

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

1) He his hurt over being fired by Trump

2) He may see an opportunity of running for political office again when Trump's tenure comes to an end. Maybe even do a Dwight Eisenhower?

1. He wasn't fired.
2. He wasn't a politician.

gormdubhgorm

moon2 wrote: »

These aren't mutually exclusive. Trumps idea of law and order can be exactly as described, and that doesn't preclude Chauvin from being charged with murder.

Chauvin could be found innocent or guilty and that still wouldn't impact Trump's beliefs. Trumps actions and words since the murder of Floyd are objectively a far cry from law abiding, or even constitution abiding.

It directly contradicts the author (Server) comments though. I suspect he would be privately pleased if Chauvin got away with murder as it would enable him to continue the 'poor me' narrative about African-American's.

If you look at what Trump has done he has just gone in hard, in response to the riots.

In 2015 when Obama was President a state of emergency was called in Baltimore in 2015. Plus the troops were called in.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/29/us/politics/events-in-baltimore-reflect-a-slow-rolling-crisis-across-us-obama-says.html

In 2014 there was another race riot in Missouri, In 2001 there was one in Cincinnati.

https://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/25/politics/obama-holder-ferguson/index.html

And of course there was the race riots in 1992 LA

gormdubhgorm

Hurrache wrote: »

1. He wasn't fired.
2. He wasn't a politician.

1) As good as fired he resigned first and now Trump claims he had the honour of firing Mattis

2) If Mattis served as Secretary of defense he will always be known as a solider/politician.

Hurrache

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

1) As good as fired he resigned first and now Trump claims he had the honour of firing Mattis

2) If Mattis served as Secretary of defense he will always be known as a solider/politician.

Facts are
1. He wasn't fired. How can you even claim he was as good as fired when when you say he resigned first.
2. He wasn't a politician. He isn't now, nor always will, be known as a politician by anyone other than those that are mistaken.

timsey tiger

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Ok he is an Ex Secretary of Defense

And it is important to consider he was involved in both in Iraq and Afganistan.
He was quoted as saying in Afganistan:

"be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet"

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/07/16-most-hair-raising-general-mattis-quotes/340553/

This is the same fella who bombed a wedding party in Iraq in 2004 resulting deaths of 42 civilians, including 11 women and 14 children.

His comments after proof was shown what he and his men did?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/may/21/iraq.rorymccarthy

"I have not seen the pictures but bad things happen in wars. I don't have to apologise for the conduct of my men."

Just what anybody would expect form ones military and the reason Trump hired him for the job.

It still amazes me that military types who admire this, who have been in actual combat, who have killed people, are so easily upset, by a guy kneeling before the flag.

Overheal

Headshot wrote: »

Trump turning the White House into Fort Knox, unbelievable all the barriers going up just to protect from peaceful protests

He's finally built that wall.

moon2

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

It directly contradicts the author (Server) comments though

How so? I didn't get this impression from my reading so I'd like to know how you've linked these. I don't see how Trump's beliefs and the charges brought against Chauvin are linked.

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I suspect he would be privately pleased if Chauvin got away with murder as it would enable him to continue the 'poor me' narrative about African-American's.

If you look at similar historical cases, police essentially have carte blanche when it comes to killing 'suspects'. They're rarely indicted, and even when they are the cases rarely result in conviction.


At the risk of understatement of the year, your use of 'poor me narrative' is dismissive and implies you do not believe there has been misconduct now or in the past. To diminish the reality of police officers murdering black Americans and facing no charges is awful. If you want to talk about biases, then analyse yours.

EDIT:

The author says the following

'police exist to protect white people from black people.'

Not true in the following video a white racist woman was killed by a black police officer.

This is the equivalent of saying "There's no such thing as deforestation because I can see a few dozen trees". The author of the article looked at a multitude of events and called out a pattern. You found a singular event and are using it to disprove the existence of this pattern. It just doesn't make sense.

In addition to that, the example you use is incomparable. Are you honestly trying to say that case is the same as when a white police officer knowingly suffocates a compliant, non-resisting, non-threatening person over the course of about 10 minutes. This is while they passed out after repeatedly saying they couldn't breath?

I mean, in your case the person was actually threatening the police officer and made very threatening moves while holding an item which has the potential to kill somone...

Carfacemandog

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Ok he is an Ex Secretary of Defense

And it is important to consider he was involved in both in Iraq and Afganistan.
He was quoted as saying in Afganistan:

"be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet"[
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/07/16-most-hair-raising-general-mattis-quotes/340553/

This is the same fella who bombed a wedding party in Iraq in 2004 resulting deaths of 42 civilians, including 11 women and 14 children.

His comments after proof was shown what he and his men did?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/may/21/iraq.rorymccarthy

"I have not seen the pictures but bad things happen in wars. I don't have to apologise for the conduct of my men."


--

As for Mattis' comments about comparing Trump's protest response to Nazi tactics.
I think there are two reasons for this.

1) He his hurt over being fired by Trump

2) He may see an opportunity of running for political office again when Trump's tenure comes to an end. Maybe even do a Dwight Eisenhower?

And yet despite all you have listed above, this guy still considers Trump as comparable to Hitler. If that doesn't tell you something about Trump it's simply because you don't want to hear it.

You also can't claim any moral highgroudn Trump may have on the back of his policies, and the increased killings and droen strikes across the middle East under his presidency - just in case that was lingering in your mind.

I have not seen any inclination towards him running in politics, and the fact that you jumped immediately on a claim if him being upset about something that never even happened (he was not fired but resigned) shows that same tendency I was talking about earlier about Trump defenders peculiar need to constantly ignore the facts when they do not suit.

The more likely reason he compared Trumps tactics to Hitler's nazi ones s because he is well known to be very strongly versed in modern history, and because the similarities between Trump and Hitler in this regard are stark, and have grown more and more so over his presidency.

gormdubhgorm

Hurrache wrote: »

Facts are
1. He wasn't fired. How can you even claim he was as good as fired when when you say he resigned first.

This is what Trump claims

https://nypost.com/2020/06/03/trump-says-he-had-the-honor-of-firing-james-mattis/

Sounds to me like Mattis jumped before he was pushed.

2. He wasn't a politician. He isn't now, nor always will, be known as a politician by anyone other than those that are mistaken.

So the 26th secretary of defense is known as defence minister in other jurisdictions.
Who was the the 26th secretary of defense? Mattis.

It is the equivalent of Richard Mulcahy a former Army General becoming minister of Defence in the Irish Free State.
Ergo he went from a military man to politician.

I don't know what is so difficult to understand about that.

gormdubhgorm

Carfacemandog wrote: »

And yet despite all you have listed above, this guy still considers Trump as comparable to Hitler. If that doesn't tell you something about Trump it's simply because you don't want to hear it.

First off Mattis did not compare Trump to Hitler he said he was using Nazi 'tactics'.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/he-tries-divide-us-former-defense-secretary-mattis-compares-trump-n1224171

Nowhere was there a mention of Hitler. Subtle difference, but an important one.
It appears that you do not want to hear it. But I will repeat again. It is clear Mattis likely has a vendetta against Trump since he was forced to resign/jump before he was pushed.
Secondly Mattis is clearly angling for political position after Trump leaves office. By saying the above Nazi remarks it puts him in pole position. Even though it is hyppocrtical given Mattis past comments such as 'horrible things happen in war' and he would not take responsibility for killing women and children and feels he has nothing to apologise for.

You also can't claim any moral highgroudn Trump may have on the back of his policies, and the increased killings and droen strikes across the middle East under his presidency - just in case that was lingering in your mind.

What American can claim the moral high ground?
JFK and Bill Clinton - were womanisers. War in viettnam. Drone Strikes afganstan
Nixon was a mischievous liar and a warmonger.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

George Bush war in Iraq under false pretenses - WMD etc.
George W Bush war in Afghanistan

Maybe Jimmy Carter?

I have not seen any inclination towards him running in politics, and the fact that you jumped immediately on a claim if him being upset about something that never even happened (he was not fired but resigned) shows that same tendency I was talking about earlier about Trump defenders peculiar need to constantly ignore the facts when they do not suit.

I have already explained this above. And as I said I have no vote one way or the other. I am not America. Just a realist.

The more likely reason he compared Trumps tactics to Hitler's nazi ones s because he is well known to be very strongly versed in modern history, and because the similarities between Trump and Hitler in this regard are stark, and have grown more and more so over his presidency.

How are they stark?
It is not a military dictatorship. There has been no enabling act. It is just a statement to ironically 'fan the flames.' To compare Trump to Hitler is laughable in the extreme. And takes away any persons credibility who says it. It might play well with the anti-Trump base though that is about it.

BonnieSituation

Anyway, the Narcissist-in-Chief is slowly deteriorating:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1268688014630322177?s=19

---

Didn't Murkowski get Primaried by McConnell and still won easily?

I'd love her to come out for Biden to really rub it in.

gormdubhgorm

moon2 wrote: »

How so? I didn't get this impression from my reading so I'd like to know how you've linked these. I don't see how Trump's beliefs and the charges brought against Chauvin are linked.

If its explained. The author views all the police as the enemy of Black America.
That is the narrative. Saying that the law is never used against the police when they commit crimes only against black Americans. Patently not true.

If you look at similar historical cases, police essentially have carte blanche when it comes to killing 'suspects'. They're rarely indicted, and even when they are the cases rarely result in conviction.

The police officer ]in question was arrested and he will be charged on June 8th

At the risk of understatement of the year, your use of 'poor me narrative' is dismissive and implies you do not believe there has been misconduct now or in the past. To diminish the reality of police officers murdering black Americans and facing no charges is awful. If you want to talk about biases, then analyse yours.

To clarify I never said there was never misconduct in the past. My point is it suits Adam Serwer to agitate and stir up resentment. That is what his opinion pieces are designed to do. I suspect he is only delighted with these recent race riots as he has a clear vendetta against Trump and wants 'his people' to rise up. It is insidious and disingenuous. The Atlantic even managed to tie in covid19 to the narrative.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/we-dont-know-whats-behind-covid-19-racial-disparity/612106/

In addition to that, the example you use is incomparable. Are you honestly trying to say that case is the same as when a white police officer knowingly suffocates a compliant, non-resisting, non-threatening person over the course of about 10 minutes. This is while they passed out after repeatedly saying they couldn't breath?

I mean, in your case the person was actually threatening the police officer and made very threatening moves while holding an item which has the potential to kill somone...

My point is that Adam Server is insulting black police officers, by implying that all police are enemies of the African American community. Also insulting decent police officers of all other races. There is a clear agenda there in his constant opinion piece output.

Cody montana

listermint wrote: »

It's absolutely excellent. A huge endictment of where the us is now.

He's gone in Nov.

Mr Biden, tear down that wall.

Cookie_Monster

Headshot wrote: »

Trump turning the White House into Fort Knox, unbelievable all the barriers going up just to protect from peaceful protests

its been going on for a while. I was in DC in January, the back of the house then had 4 layers of fencing and the front fence was being replaced by one about 1.5m or so taller than the existing one. The road out the front has also been closed of and barriered as a result of those works so effectively 3 fences out front now as well.

y0ssar1an22

Headshot wrote: »

Trump turning the White House into Fort Knox, unbelievable all the barriers going up just to protect from peaceful protests

peaceful? have you seen the pics (or vids, even better) of the mass looting's going on? i'd hate to see your definition of a hostile crowd!

Cody montana

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

peaceful? have you seen the pics (or vids, even better) of the mass looting's going on? i'd hate to see your definition of a hostile crowd!

The protesters outside the White House were peaceful.

TomOnBoard

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

But over all the article you have linked is well written if a bit biased. And shows a massive chip on Serwer's shoulder.

That's not a massive chip on his shoulder.... It's the knee of white elitism and racism on his neck!

TomOnBoard

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Ok he is an Ex Secretary of Defense


--

As for Mattis' comments about comparing Trump's protest response to Nazi tactics.
I think there are two reasons for this.

1) He his hurt over being fired by Trump

2) He may see an opportunity of running for political office again when Trump's tenure comes to an end. Maybe even do a Dwight Eisenhower?

Nope on both...

1) he wasnt fired.. He resigned

And

2) he has never run for a political office. He was a politically -uninvolved retired General who was asked to become SecDef.

TomOnBoard

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

1) As good as fired he resigned first and now Trump claims he had the honour of firing Mattis

2) If Mattis served as Secretary of defense he will always be known as a solider/politician.

Nope to both:

1) Mattis resigned. Trump lied. Another lie to add to the 18,000+ lies and counting..

2) As SecDef he will always be seen as Retired Military who was a Civilian when asked to become SecDef.

TomOnBoard

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

This is what Trump claims

https://nypost.com/2020/06/03/trump-says-he-had-the-honor-of-firing-james-mattis/

Sounds to me like Mattis jumped before he was pushed.

Ah, so we should believe you over John Kelly who was there and you weren't?

As for what Trump says? Were his lips moving? If so, then he was lying. 18,000+ and rising...

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

So the 26th secretary of defense is known as defence minister in other jurisdictions.
Who was the the 26th secretary of defense? Mattis.

It is the equivalent of Richard Mulcahy a former Army General becoming minister of Defence in the Irish Free State.
Ergo he went from a military man to politician.

I don't know what is so difficult to understand about that.

Ergo you're making a silly equivalence:

Mulcahy was a former military man who was elected to the Dail and became Minister in a Government.
Mattis was a retired military man who was asked to serve in a non-elected, apolitical Cabinet position as a Civilian.

"I don't know what is so difficult to understand about that"...

moon2

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

If its explained. The author views all the police as the enemy of Black America.
That is the narrative. Saying that the law is never used against the police when they commit crimes only against black Americans. Patently not true.

The author did not say that. I'm honestly not sure how you can read the article and come to the conclusion that the law is never used against the police when it includes clear examples of how and when the law was used. It even goes into detail about how some protections to increase accountability have been eroded.

Just to be certain were referencing the same article - is this the one you read? https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/chauvin-did-what-trump-asked-him-do/612574/

The police officer ]in question was arrested and he will be charged on June 8th

Ok? Are you agreeing with, or refuting, the point I made about historical cases?

There is a clear agenda there in his constant opinion piece output.

I think there's a misunderstanding here. It is normal for people to write multiple articles about areas they're interested in, or are affected by. It is normal for these articles to have broadly similar themes. This is not an agenda, this is just how journalists do their job.


Don't write off the veracity of an article, or series of articles, simply because the author has been motivated to write about a topic multiple times. This is not an 'agenda', this is just good practice.

So the 26th secretary of defense is known as defence minister in other jurisdictions.
Who was the the 26th secretary of defense? Mattis.

It is the equivalent of Richard Mulcahy a former Army General becoming minister of Defence in the Irish Free State.
Ergo he went from a military man to politician.

I don't know what is so difficult to understand about that.

I feel that between this and your 'the author views all police as enemies' response I'm beginning to understand where you're coming from. You're projecting too much of your own personal opinion and belief into the actions of others. This latter example is quite unusual. You can't call an American non-political position political just because it is that way in other countries. It's just wrong.

Quin_Dub

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Anyway, the Narcissist-in-Chief is slowly deteriorating:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1268688014630322177?s=19

---

Didn't Murkowski get Primaried by McConnell and still won easily?

I'd love her to come out for Biden to really rub it in.

Murkowski actually lost the GOP Primary and still won the Senate seat by a decent margin from a write in vote.

That was 2010 - So she clearly has a level of personal support that isn't directly tied to the GOP election machine in Alaska , but even if Murkowski feels somewhat safe , Trumps reaction will quell any thoughts from any other Elected GOP officials to potentially speak up.

He has just said , if anyone dares to question me , I'll get you fired.

Democracy indeed.

Christy42

Trump is doubling down against the protestors. Referring to the peaceful ones as terrorists. So much for being an ally. Hilarious the man giving out about twitter over his first amendment rights which really refer to what the government do I. E. him shutting down peaceful protests.


https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/04/politics/trump-letter-protesters/index.html

Midlife

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

This is what Trump claims

https://nypost.com/2020/06/03/trump-says-he-had-the-honor-of-firing-james-mattis/

Sounds to me like Mattis jumped before he was pushed.



So the 26th secretary of defense is known as defence minister in other jurisdictions.
Who was the the 26th secretary of defense? Mattis.

It is the equivalent of Richard Mulcahy a former Army General becoming minister of Defence in the Irish Free State.
Ergo he went from a military man to politician.

I don't know what is so difficult to understand about that.

LOL,. Did you spend a while pontificating about checking biases before basically giving full credence to Trump's version of events as it appeared in the New York Post?

extra gravy

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1268622750463062017?s=19

What an incoherent mess, full of deflection and whataboutery as usual. Never has a President talked so much but said so little.

BonnieSituation

extra gravy wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1268622750463062017?s=19

What an incoherent mess, full of deflection and whataboutery as usual. Never has a President talked so much but said so little.

There's a lot of gibberish to unpack there, but this though:

"...he feels comfortable with the mask on. I think - even though there was nobody around him, which is interesting..."

You just know he sees wearing masks as a weakness.

gormdubhgorm

TomOnBoard wrote: »

That's not a massive chip on his shoulder.... It's the knee of white elitism and racism on his neck!

Are you being funny here it is hard to tell. Because it made me laugh.

moon2

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Are you being funny here it is hard to tell. Because it made me laugh.

And this is the root of the difference in opinion. You believe the author has a chip on his shoulder as you don't believe there is a problem.

Most of the world recognises there is a problem and would agree the author is giving an accurate description of it.

gormdubhgorm

Midlife wrote: »

LOL,. Did you spend a while pontificating about checking biases before basically giving full credence to Trump's version of events as it appeared in the New York Post?

There will always be biases. But unlike others on this thread - I am not in hysterics going on about Hitler and fascism. I am a neutral observer. I am neither a democratic supporter nor a republican supporter. I am an Irish citizen living in Ireland who finds this thread very amusing. As Irish citizens get 'het up' about Trump because he does not align to thier political viewpoint.

So far on this thread I have seen posters post images of Star Wars stormtroopers and comparing them to Trump.
I have seen another one where a video made of Reegan talking about the Berlin Wall while a video played about a fence near the white house. Which is supposed to demonstrate how even Reegan is against Trump or something.
Other people are trying to convince themselves that Mattis was not a politician even though he served as Secretary of Defense. If that is not cognitive dissonance I do not know what is.

I think it is laughable that Irish people pretend to care about American politics.
It is just entertainment. In particular as long as they play the game and say the right things to the Irish.

How many people of Ireland protested Obama's visit when he was using Shannon as a stop over to wage war? They named a plaza after him begorrah.

I remember this comment he gave without irony.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2011/may/27/barack-obama-guinness-taste-ireland

"The first time I had Guinness," Obama said, "is when I came to the Shannon airport. We were flying into Afghanistan and so stopped in Shannon. It was the middle of the night. And I tried one of these and I realised it tastes so much better here than it does in the States ... You're keeping all the best stuff here!"

How many Irish people called for Clinton to be impeached because of the Monica Scandal and subsequent lie when he was in Ireland in 1998?

Yet we had the charade of an impeachment attempt against Trump. (Which was never more than political gamesmanship - as it needed control of the two houses for a start.) Yet it set many Irish people frothing at the mouth to 'get' Trump.

The Americans can vote for who they wish and they have done so.
If any Irish person on this thread really wants to be effective in American politics they should get the Green Card/American Citizenship and feck off to America. Then vote for who they want to thier hearts content

Silly memes and videos, and reading agenda led articles are not going to change a thing. You are in Ireland and an Irish citizen. You cannot effect American politics. Get real. They have different politics in America than Ireland. A different culture and outlook. Yet people from a tiny nation of Ireland think they can look down thier nose at American's just because they are not like them. Or even have the arrogance to say they are wrong and they do not know it!
The smugness is unreal.

Leroy42

BonnieSituation wrote: »

There's a lot of gibberish to unpack there, but this though:

"...he feels comfortable with the mask on. I think - even though there was nobody around him, which is interesting..."

You just know he sees wearing masks as a weakness.

The thing that gets me is why his supporters believe that he has any ability to plan or action anything when he clearly has no ability to discuss any subject with any degree of clarity.

No way, based on everything we have heard from him, that he could ever be able to get across a health care plan, or a plan to bring jobs back or anything.

And when dealing with other world leaders, you have the added issue of translation. It must be incredible difficult to translate what Trump is saying as it makes no sense.

Leroy42

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

You are in Ireland and an Irish citizen. You cannot effect American politics. Get real. They have a different politics in America than Ireland. A different culture and outlook. Yet people from a tiny nation of Ireland think they can look down thier nose at American's just because they are not like them. Or wrong and they do not know it.
The smugness is unreal

Because America effects the entire world, and definitely has a major influence on Ireland.

But I would ask if you think all this is nonsense, then why are you commenting? You can't simply say that you are neutral, that is a cop out.

They are things Trump has done that you can't be neutral on. Coming out of the Paris Accord, pulling out of the Iran Deal. They affect the entire world so its a cop out to say you have no position.

The majority of people on this thread are commenting on Trump because. like it or not, what happens in the US tends to move across. So many are worried about the possibility of the actions of Trump being seen as normal and copied.

And we already see it in the UK, were laws are now simply suggestions and stats are simply numbers that can be moved around and facts are open to interpretation.

Carfacemandog

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

First off Mattis did not compare Trump to Hitler he said he was using Nazi 'tactics'.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/he-tries-divide-us-former-defense-secretary-mattis-compares-trump-n1224171

Nowhere was there a mention of Hitler. Subtle difference, but an important one.
It appears that you do not want to hear it. But I will repeat again. It is clear Mattis likely has a vendetta against Trump since he was forced to resign/jump before he was pushed.
Secondly Mattis is clearly angling for political position after Trump leaves office. By saying the above Nazi remarks it puts him in pole position. Even though it is hyppocrtical given Mattis past comments such as 'horrible things happen in war' and he would not take responsibility for killing women and children and feels he has nothing to apologise for.

1. There is no difference between Nazi and Hitler, given Hitler founded and led the Nazi party through basically it's entire existence barring a brief period after his suicide, and did so as the undisputed, unquestioned 'leader'. That you are trying to use "Mattis compared Trump to the NAZIS not HITLER is astounding though entirely expected, to be honest.

2. Mattis did not jump before being pushed, as John Kelly who was Chief of Staff has asserted. You might not like that but it is what it is. Serving under this administration is an embarrassment, a tarnishing on your record, and he had had enough.

3. Criticising Trump is not 'angling for political position', the fact that you can't see past this again shows a reflexive need to ignore the facts or reality. You will need to show how he has been looking to get into political positions, which political positions, and how in order to have any credibility in this statement whatsoever.

What American can claim the moral high ground?
JFK and Bill Clinton - were womanisers. War in viettnam. Drone Strikes afganstan
Nixon was a mischievous liar and a warmonger.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

George Bush war in Iraq under false pretenses - WMD etc.
George W Bush war in Afghanistan

Maybe Jimmy Carter?

It is incredibly how easy it is to predict responses from Trump's defenders hence why I pre-empted this correctly, only to see you try it anyway with the goalposts shifted to (quelle surprise) whataboutism of previous presidents. So now tell me, which of these presidents had their own secretarial appointees comparing them to Hitler and the Nazis?

I have already explained this above. And as I said I have no vote one way or the other. I am not America. Just a realist.

Again back to a straw man about 'no voting' which we covered only a few posts back. There is nothing realistic in your posts made on this subject, as you have not backed them up with anything of worth nor note.

How are they stark?
It is not a military dictatorship. There has been no enabling act. It is just a statement to ironically 'fan the flames.' To compare Trump to Hitler is laughable in the extreme. And takes away any persons credibility who says it. It might play well with the anti-Trump base though that is about it.

Running through their shared fascist tendencies with a mix of copy/paste from this article by experts on fascism, and my own words: https://www.gq.com/story/is-america-heading-towards-fascism

1. An Era of Social Upheaval - Fascism tends to arise out of a very specific set of circumstances: when a group of people that once felt politically and economically secure suddenly finds themselves feeling marginalized. After World War I, devastating hyperinflation and unemployment exacerbated the humiliation of Germany’s defeat, fomenting widespread disillusionment among its citizens. In his review of historian Hannah Arendt’s classic work The Origins of Totalitarianism, Isaac describes a “generalized crisis of legitimacy” throughout post-war Europe in which “large numbers of people felt dispossessed, disenfranchised, and disconnected from dominant social institutions,” unsure how they fit into the emerging world order—if at all anymore. This a perfect descriptor for a lot of Trump's modern day support, especially 'rust belters'.

2. A Nostalgia for a Lost, Glorious Past - German dictator Adolf Hitler cast his Third Reich as the successor to the pre-war German Empire, and to the Holy Roman Empire before that vs Trump's "Make America Great Again" (compared to when, exactly?)

3. The Scapegoating of Minority Groups
Once a group has identified a problem, they must identify a way to fix it. And this, says Dumm, is a key moment in the emergence of fascism. “When people are feeling insecure about their status, they can go one of two ways,” he explains. “They can say, ‘We have to work together to make things better.’ But the fascist response is to find scapegoats, and build the idea things will be better if these people are marginalized and dealt with.” ... Academic studies of 2016 Trump voters suggest that white Christian males were more motivated by the perceived loss of their group's dominant status than by economic well-being. Scapegoating enables people to duck their collective responsibility to solve hard problems, or to even think about what causes foundational economic shifts in the first place. It is easier, for example, to blame immigrants and refugees for disappearing jobs than it is to grapple with the intertwined complexities of globalization, climate change, and the steady accumulation of corporate power.

4. A Strongman Savior - fascism relies on a strong, charismatic authoritarian figure, uniquely equipped to do what must be done to solve the problem without allowing pesky institutions to stand in the way. The leader becomes the vessel for the authentic will of the people, and any dissenters become enemies of the state. ... Egomaniacal, almost messianic declarations are common among fascist strongmen. ... Hitler declared himself the true representative of “have-nots” everywhere. “I know that the whole German nation is behind me,” he said. “I am the guardian of its future, and I act accordingly.” ... While accepting his party’s presidential nomination at the Republication National Convention in 2016, Trump declared his own political uniqueness. “Nobody knows the system better than me,” he told attendees, “which is why I alone can fix it.”

5. The Stifling of Dissent - Hitler consolidated power by suspending civil liberties and cutting the legislature out of the lawmaking process. We are seeing this today in Trump's attempts to completely undermine the law, primarily through William Barr who was appointed on the back of a 19 page letter explcitly arguing the law does not apply to Trump, with mail in voting rights (mail in voting that Trump uses) being the latest of many examples ... He has, for example, referred to journalists as “the enemy of the people,” frequently calling out specific outlets and reporters who publish stories he does not like. He has also advocated for the imprisonment of political rivals, asserted that Democratic politicians "hate America," and dismissed as illegitimate any attempts to exercise oversight over his administration’s alleged wrongdoing.

6. Ritualistic Communal Bonding - Rallies are integral to the strength of fascism because they reiterate its core promises: that the nation must be restored to its rightful place in the world, and the leader is solely capable of bringing about that result. ... In Nazi Germany, rallies were choreographed affairs that built party loyalty and glorified nationalistic might. Hitler wrote of the “suggestive ecstasy” that comes with having one’s views affirmed by thousands of fellow rally-goers, and relied heavily on stage lighting and other theatrical effects to enthrall audiences with spectacle. Trump, a show business and social media personality before entering politics, understands the importance of spectacle, too. His “Make America Great Again” rallies are televised rituals in which he encourages attendees to join one another—and him—in acts of cathartic release. (In a recent op-ed, the New York Times’s Jamelle Bouie attributed Trump’s “unbreakable bond" with supporters to the permission he gives them to “express their sense of siege.”)

---

Expanding further in my own words with a few other examples, including but absolutely not limited to:
Moving beyond that, we have the fact that Trump wedged his way into the public consciousness using a new medium that could reach the masses which most other politicians had not fully latched on to, and which would allow him to shout down others and create an echo chamber, namely social media and especially Twitter. This is also true of Hitler, as the inventor of the megaphone went to his grave feeling somewhat responsible for the rise of the Nazi party due to Hitler's (and Goebbels') masterful use of it, while many other politicians were simply shouting from the top of their lungs at much smaller gatherings.

We have the systemic use of concentration camps for some of the vilified minorities upon whom societies problems can be blamed, from above. Sure it's 'their rapists and murderers' that are coming to the southern US border, who cares if they get thrown into concentration camps, children separated from their parents and all in the process? Thankfully Trump's are not on the scale nor murderous tendencies of Hitler's, but to be honest at this point I would not find myself all that surprised if he were to attempt to use similar for protesters seen on the street, or if he were to escalate their 'uses'.

Trump also literally borrows language and phrases used by explicit supporters of Hitler and the Nazi party during the 1930s and 40s in the US, particularly 'America First'.

Then you have the fact that Trump's administration has been found to have actual white supremacists and neo Nazis within it, perhaps most notably Stephen Miller, which is why they actual U.S Justice Department were sending links to anti-Semitic websites to prominent Jewish groups, in other words not even trying to hide it - https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2019/08/23/federal-judges-received-link-an-anti-semitic-blog-post-it-came-justice-department/ . Trump refuses to so much as acknowledge any of this, never mind act against it.

You also have the dehumanisation and attempts to paint those politically opposed to him as 'violent animals' and the likes, while glossing over and ignoring the violence of his own 'very fine' supporters, something Hitler and the Nazis used to great effect to silence opposition and even frame their own supporters acts of violence as committed by others. For all his eagerness to call in the actual army to slaughter protesters in recent days, it was only a few weeks ago that Trump was actively calling for armed uprisings to 'liberate' states with Democratic governors who refused to reopen for him.

The aggressive stuffing of the federal courts with judges based on nothing more than political ideology (many of whom have been entirely under-qualified, some even without a single trial's worth of experience) and subjecting them to executive oversight (e.g. "don't step out of line") fits in perfectly with Gleichschaltung, as the Nazi's had a bit of an obsession with trying to do just about everything that the Weimar administration before them had put in place just as Trump is with Obama.

The list could go on and on, but it largely revolves around:
- Build populist, angry following on a vague sense of nostalgia and anger about the present, directing said anger towards particular groups who can be blamed for all of societies wrongs rather than looking at the wider picture.
- Unify this following with constant engagement, rallies, and contact to reinforce these ideas, vilify all opposition as 'liars' and create a siege mentality so that any dissenting voices will not be listened to regardless of their validity. This also makes it clear to all within that stepping out of line will create serious issues for anyone who dates (the recent movie Jojo Rabbit captured this quite well). Place yourself as an infallible strong man with all the answers for any issue that might arise, and anyone who dissents as merely jealous of your glory or an enemy of the people.
- Use this anger to mobilise your voter base, both to the booth and out into the public to intimidate and threaten anyone who dares speak against you.
- If/when this escalates into violence, ensure to blame the opposition wherever possible and avoid doing so with your own supporters. Downplay your own supporters instances of violence while using any and all from the opposition as reasons to further impose your own authority, preferably with structures in place to do so with minimal obstruction (courts under your control, a congress that will refuse to convict you even when they admit you are guilty, etc). Wherever possible, blow up any institution that might not be willing to submit to you as such (typically referred to as purges, though they can also be mass resignations)/
- If the opportunity to escalate the violence and tensions in instances involving opposition occurs, always always always take it.
- Never let an opportunity pass to sow division among any who speak out against you in any capacity whatsoever, even when it might seem unnecessary to the casual onlooker. If two separate groups in the opposition have their own disagreements but believe they can still work together and very much see you as the common enemy, make sure you and your support are at all instances shouting how "the [opposition] are eating each other!" and use this to reinforce your dehumanisation of them as uncivil, inferior, and entirely unfit to rule.
- Inch by inch, use the above tactics to try and take over every facet of government, and as many aspects of public and private life as possible. Turn up the temperature as appropriate - what your supporters might not agree with today, they can be convinced are perfectly acceptable tomorrow or the day after (which has very much been a feature of the last 3-4 years of the Trump presidency, predictions of his actions his supporters would have given a "lol yeah right!" response to in 2016 or 2017, they in 2020 will instead respond to with "yeah, and he is right").

Leroy42

Wow, what a great detailed post.

gormdubhgorm

Leroy42 wrote: »

Because America effects the entire world, and definitely has a major influence on Ireland.

But I would ask if you think all this is nonsense, then why are you commenting? You can't simply say that you are neutral, that is a cop out.

But it is funny seeing Irish people go into hissy fits in something they can pretend to be involved in. Pat Kenny has jump on the ship. Comparing Trump to Sadam and Hitler. This from a once reasonably balanced broadcaster.

There are no comments on the cynicism of the democrats Joe Biden vote for me or you ain't black.

Hillary (dodging sniper fire mates with Saudis) Clinton. A careerist calculating politician who did a Tammy Wynette for the sake of a political career. Who only stated she supported Gay Marraige in 2013 when it became politically expedient to do so.

https://www.eqca.org/hillary-clinton-has-a-new-position-on-same-sex-marriage/

They are things Trump has done that you can't be neutral on. Coming out of the Paris Accord, pulling out of the Iran Deal. They affect the entire world so its a cop out to say you have no position.

The Paris accord is a cop out. How many targets are ever hit? The farce of carbon credits

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_credit

https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-buying-carbon-credits-4681370-Jun2019/

Iran deal is not going to make any difference the nuclear deterrent is there no one is going to fire nuclear weapons at anyone any time soon.

The majority of people on this thread are commenting on Trump because. like it or not, what happens in the US tends to move across. So many are worried about the possibility of the actions of Trump being seen as normal and copied.

And we already see it in the UK, were laws are now simply suggestions and stats are simply numbers that can be moved around and facts are open to interpretation.

If the Irish electorate want a Trump they can elect a Trump. But a Hillary or Trump is not going to elected in Ireland. Ireland do not have that type of political class or system for a start. Plus the only real link I see with Ireland and the US is the tech industry. Which Ireland could get billions from if they wished following the EU ruling. Recession solved.

pixelburp

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

But it is funny seeing Irish people go into hissy fits in something they can pretend to be involved in. Pat Kenny has jump on the ship. Comparing Trump to Sadam and Hitler. This from a once reasonably balanced broadcaster.

There are no comments on the cynicism of the democrats Joe Biden vote for me or you ain't black.

Can't speak to the press, but in terms of Boards, that's completely untrue; if you read the dedicated Election thread in this forum, you'd see there's no love lost for Biden.

He was a depressing, careerist & Establishment choice, but in the wake of the Populist disaster that is Trump, a return to normalcy is probably a salve to the desperate. It didn't really come as a surprise.

America has a systemic problem with its politics and elections; Trump was a clear push against that establishment and those feeling left behind from the shifting economy - but like a lot of these populist elections, the saviour turned out to be a spoofer. Whataboutery doesn't negate the fact there are clear degrees of corruptive influences in the country's politics; be it the arrogance of the 2 parties and the system that benefits them - or the wildcard chaos of the tycoon taking a punt on a political career.

Trump is a symptom of the disease. He's still a dreadful leader.

Professor Moriarty

pixelburp wrote: »

Can't speak to the press, but in terms of Boards, that's completely untrue; if you read the dedicated Election thread in this forum, you'd see there's no love lost for Biden.

He was a depressing, careerist & Establishment choice, but in the wake of the Populist disaster that is Trump, a return to normalcy is probably a salve to the desperate. It didn't really come as a surprise.

America has a systemic problem with its politics and elections; Trump was a clear push against that establishment and those feeling left behind from the shifting economy - but like a lot of these populist elections, the saviour turned out to be a spoofer. Whataboutery doesn't negate the fact there are clear degrees of corruptive influences in the country's politics; be it the arrogance of the 2 parties and the system that benefits them - or the wildcard chaos of the tycoon taking a punt on a political career.

Trump is a symptom of the disease. He's still a dreadful leader.

Not so sure about that. In 1972, 48 years ago, he campaigned for the Senate with these as his main policies:

Withdrawal from Vietnam; the environment; civil rights; mass transit; more equitable taxation; health care.

For that reason alone, I'd vote for him.

pixelburp

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Not so sure about that. In 1972, 48 years ago, he campaigned for the Senate with these as his main policies:

Withdrawal from Vietnam; the environment; civil rights; mass transit; more equitable taxation; health care.

For that reason alone, I'd vote for him.

That's it though: 48 years. Part of the problem with American politics is that below the Presidency, there's an awful mass of deadwood clogging up the hallways of power with no term limits. Those policies are definitely admirable, but to perversely quote The Dark Knight: you live long enough to see yourself become the villain. Biden and his generation need to step aside, let others take the reigns and lead policy.

That's not to say there aren't folks in the Dáil overstaying their welcome, but it feels positively seeped throughout the US. Chuck Grassley or Diane Feinstein have no business clinging onto power, and how can change happen when you got generations in control from the very era the younger are trying to move on from? Though it's somewhat ironic that the Great White Hope of the young was septuagenarian Bernie Sanders. While liberals in general quiver in fear octogenarian Ginsberg will pass on before Trump might be removed from office.

Like, here's Congressman Elliot Engel, 73 years and in power since 1988, simply saying if he wasn't up for election he wouldn't care about speaking on the protests. There's little that angers me more than ageism and the abuse of the elderly - but American politics is being held back by the aged:

https://twitter.com/KurtSemder/status/1267895631827386375

Professor Moriarty

pixelburp wrote: »

That's it though: 48 years. Part of the problem with American politics is that below the Presidency, there's an awful mass of deadwood clogging up the hallways of power. Those policies are definitely admirable, but to perversely quote The Dark Knight: you live long enough to see yourself become the villain. Biden and his generation need to step aside, let others take the reigns and lead policy.

That's not to say there aren't folks in the Dáil overstaying their welcome, but it feels positively seeped throughout the US. Chuck Grassley or Diane Feinstein have no business clinging onto power, and how can change happen when you got generations in control from the very era the younger are trying to move on from? Though it's somewhat ironic that the Great White Hope of the young was septuagenarian Bernie Sanders.

Like, here's Congressman Elliot Engel, 73 years and in power since 1988, simply saying if he wasn't up for election he wouldn't care about speaking on the protests. There's little that angers me more than ageism and the abuse of the elderly - but American politics is being held back by the aged:

https://twitter.com/KurtSemder/status/1267895631827386375

Good point. I find his age a great drawback. It's not ageist to say that a a 78 year old might not have sufficient energy for four years in what is probably the most high pressure job in the world. That's simply a fact. But the Dems have decided that he's for them so that's that. In terms of character and though he's not perfect, for a politician, I see much to admire in Biden. And not just by contrast with Trump - as standalone person and politician.

Ande1975

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

But it is funny seeing Irish people go into hissy fits in something they can pretend to be involved in.


If the Irish electorate want a Trump they can elect a Trump. But a Hillary or Trump is not going to elected in Ireland. Ireland do not have that type of political class or system for a start. Plus the only real link I see with Ireland and the US is the tech industry. Which Ireland could get billions from if they wished following the EU ruling. Recession solved.

Drivel!
I cannot believe I am engaging in this but there have been some amazing responses on this thread that acknowledge and explain the slow rise in autocracy and fascism that is/has been happening which to be fair started long before Trump arrived. And please can we just let it go about Hillary. She isn't POTUS for the love of God.

Irish people 'don't pretend to be involved in', we are involved in what happens in the US AS it is very personal for many of us as we have families, close and friends associated with it. If I'd family in Russia, I'd certainly be paying a lot more attention there too.

No one will argue that the US is nirvana, it has extremely corrupt politics filled with dark money but from the age of 20 - 40, it was a country I loved visiting, either with work or to see family and always dreamed of living in. Landing in Logan Airport would give me goosebumps.

I remembered the awe I felt as a J1-er visiting Washington DC. Seeing the White House, Capitol Hill and driving into the car park of the Pentagon.
Stopping in a petrol station in NJ, and seeing the twin towers off in the distance and getting more goosebumps.
Being at the top (not allowed onto the roof) of the WTC in NY the year Al Qaeda detonated a bomb in the car park.
The absolute devastation when those towers fell as they symbolized so much.
It felt like home in ways.

I nearly had the opportunity to move and up to 4 years ago, I kicked myself for not being brave enough. I am lucky that through US investment in Ireland, I didn't have to emigrate the same way my siblings had to. The States both provided opportunity but also sadness for many many families due to emigration.

I thank God now I didn't move.

Trump has tainted that (admittedly) naive and idealistic view of the US. Practically ruined the office of the Presidency, knee capping government institutions, DC has a unidentified police presence which cannot be accounted for. The Trump crime family are barricading themselves in the WH and I don't think any of us can begin to imagine what is to come and I hope it doesn't. Anyone who says it couldn't happen here are willfully naive.

Chips Lovell

Mod Note

Several posts have been deleted, several cards have been issued and one more poster has earned themselves a thread ban.

Please read the charter if you haven't done so already:

High standards of debate and quality posts / threads are required. Repeated one liner, low quality style posts will result in a ban. Threads (and posts) that are not based on serious and legitimate Political discussion will be deleted without warning.

If you're just here to take pot shots at other posters or try wind them up, think twice about posting. There are many, many places where you can do this on the internet. This isn't one of them.

pixelburp

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Good point. I find his age a great drawback. It's not ageist to say that a a 78 year old might not have sufficient energy for four years in what is probably the most high pressure job in the world. That's simply a fact. But the Dems have decided that he's for them so that's that. In terms of character and though he's not perfect, for a politician, I see much to admire in Biden. And not just by contrast with Trump - as standalone person and politician.

Leaving aside his personal flaws and issues, Biden's heart is in the right place & think ultimately he means well. But equally, he has worked in Washington enough that even if not tainted completely, is likely more resigned and accepting of "how things work" than newer, fresher voices. Say what you will about Ocasio-Cortez but the woman has been a firework under the backside of Establishment complacency & the battling between her "Squad" and Nancy Pelosi was telling. Very much old guard vs. new. Part of Washington's problem is ... well, it kind of IS a swamp, of complacency and lifetime appointments.

This is why the VP pick is so critical though: with the best will in the world I'd be honestly very surprised if Biden makes it through one term - and presumably if Biden didn't run in 2024 his VP would take his place automatically (against Ivanka Trump, ha). There's a distinct lack of fresh voices in American politics; maybe the conversation is about liberalism, conservatism or anything that partisan - but of Young vs. Old. Politicians old enough to remember Jim Crow: that's very suspect.

Lolle06

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

But it is funny seeing Irish people go into hissy fits in something they can pretend to be involved in.
Hillary (dodging sniper fire mates with Saudis) Clinton. A careerist calculating politician who did a Tammy Wynette for the sake of a political career.

The Paris accord is a cop out. How many targets are ever hit?
Iran deal is not going to make any difference the nuclear deterrent is there no one is going to fire nuclear weapons at anyone any time soon.

Apart from the fact that a lot of ppl in Ireland are working for US American Tech Companies, many families have family ties to the USA and very concerned family members. So yes, we can and will be concerned with US politics!

My family are democrats.
If you are a democrat in the USA you are now firmly on the list of sworn enemies of the current POTUS and his wannabe-regime.
Do you know who also did this? Hitler!
Social Democrats had to go into hiding, move abroad or they ended up in a KZ.

POTUS, the WH and Fox News also keep on calling the protesters „Antifa terrorists“, even though the majority is very peaceful.

However, some investigators found links to alt-right groups and civil war supporters, who join the protests to cause trouble and anti-protester sentiment.

That’s not the first time, protests get highjacked and manipulated for a different cause.

Trump not honoring and even cancelling international agreements is also not new.
The Nazi party did this too.

So, all in all we have a right to be concerned - even if we are living in Ireland.

The Nal

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Withdrawal from Vietnam; the environment; civil rights; mass transit; more equitable taxation; health care.

Garden variety career politician issues.

Professor Moriarty

pixelburp wrote: »

Leaving aside his personal flaws and issues, Biden's heart is in the right place & think ultimately he means well. But equally, he has worked in Washington enough that even if not tainted completely, is likely more resigned and accepting of "how things work" than newer, fresher voices. Say what you will about Ocasio-Cortez but the woman has been a firework under the backside of Establishment complacency & the battling between her "Squad" and Nancy Pelosi was telling. Very much old guard vs. new. Part of Washington's problem is ... well, it kind of IS a swamp, of complacency and lifetime appointments.

This is why the VP pick is so critical though: with the best will in the world I'd be honestly very surprised if Biden makes it through one term - and presumably if Biden didn't run in 2024 his VP would take his place automatically (against Ivanka Trump, ha). There's a distinct lack of fresh voices in American politics; maybe the conversation is about liberalism, conservatism or anything that partisan - but of Young vs. Old. Politicians old enough to remember Jim Crow: that's very suspect.

Yes, but Biden was very liberal for his time. I'm guessing not much has changed. Anyway, here's the rub. You need someone who will get elected. Biden has to be all things to most men. So he has to appear conservative enough to attract the middle while also attracting the people who support Ocasio-Cortez. Sure, American politics needs a shakeup. But now is not the time. It's too binary to take any chances. First and foremost, remove Trump. Ocasio-Cortez won't do that so she's out. Biden has a great chance, swing in behind him. Biden is fine and the priority is no Trump.

Unfortunately, his VP pick needs to be relatively mainstream as well. Many people will agree with you that Biden may well not last the term. So they will look to his VP and assume that is who they are ultimately voting in as POTUS.