2020 US Presidential Election (aka: The Trump Coronation)

Timberrrrrrrr

notobtuse wrote: »

I informed the White House I would be using that material and change the I's to He's in posts. They thanked me and had no objection.

Yeah, sure you did :rolleyes:

People in glass houses and all that.

notobtuse

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Yeah, sure you did :rolleyes:

People in glass houses and all that.

Yup, they thanked me and said if there were any issues they would get back to me. They never got back to me, therefore I take that as no objection.

notobtuse

Poldsgold wrote: »

Apparently Nancy Pelosi would become president on January 20th, 2021 if there is no election in 2020 (line of succession).

I'm not sure if that is 100% accurate, but if it is... you can expect that to be overruled in the coming months by William Barr and the SC.

The Twentieth Amendment, Section 3 provides that "if there is no president-elect on January 20, or the president-elect "fails to qualify", the vice president-elect would become acting president on January 20 until there is a qualified president."

I don't think there is a provision for no election, but why would there be no election as mandated by the Twelfth Amendment?

Timberrrrrrrr

notobtuse wrote: »

Yup, they thanked me and said if there were any issues they would get back to me. They never got back to me, therefore I take that as no objection.

Lying rather than admitting you plagiarized and tried to pass it off as your own. Pretty sad thing to do.

Poldsgold

notobtuse wrote: »

The Twentieth Amendment, Section 3 provides that "if there is no president-elect on January 20, or the president-elect "fails to qualify", the vice president-elect would become acting president on January 20 until there is a qualified president."

I don't think there is a provision for no election, but why would there be no election as mandated by the Twelfth Amendment?

That is in reference to the start of a presidential reign, not the end. E.g. in this instance it would be for January 20th 2017, not January 20th, 2021 - if Trump has died between the election and then being an example.

It also specifies that the terms of the VP and President end at the exact same time in Section 1.

Your quoted part also does not appear anywhere in the document, and you appear to be quoting directly from Wikipedia and trying to pass it off as the wording of the constitution as googling that 'quote' led me here. Not only that, but you appear to have added the quotation marks yourself to make it look like it was directly from the Constitution, when the wikipedia article has no such thing - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President-elect_of_the_United_States

How did that happen?


Here is the full text: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/amendments-11-27

Section 1.
The terms of the President and the Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3rd day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Section 2.
The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3rd day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Section 3.
If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

Section 4.
The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.

Section 5.
Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the ratification of this article.

Section 6.
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission.

notobtuse

Poldsgold wrote: »

That is in reference to the start of a presidential reign, not the end. E.g. in this instance it would be for January 20th 2017, not January 20th, 2021 - if Trump has died between the election and then being an example.

It also specifies that the terms of the VP and President end at the exact same time in Section 1.

Your quoted part also does not appear anywhere in the document, and you appear to be quoting directly from Wikipedia and trying to pass it off as the wording of the constitution as googling that 'quote' led me here. Not only that, but you appear to have added the quotation marks yourself to make it look like it was directly from the Constitution, when the wikipedia article has no such thing - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President-elect_of_the_United_States

How did that happen?


Here is the full text: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/amendments-11-27

Never said where I got the quote from, only wanted to inform that the passage I posted was quoted.

Again, what does it matter because the Amendments to the Constitution require an election.

notobtuse

Joe Biden has announced the creation of a “Public Health Advisory Committee.” Yippee! Does anybody think Biden’s committee will serve any purpose other than second guessing the Trump administration’s actions and then complaining to the media?

And guess who’s on the committee? Ezekiel Emanuel, a prime architect of Obamacare. And Emanuel thinks everyone should want to die by age 75.

Something he wrote a couple years ago:

Here is a simple truth that many of us seem to resist: living too long is also a loss. It renders many of us, if not disabled, then faltering and declining, a state that may not be worse than death but is nonetheless deprived. It robs us of our creativity and ability to contribute to work, society, the world. It transforms how people experience us, relate to us, and, most important, remember us. We are no longer remembered as vibrant and engaged but as feeble, ineffectual, even pathetic.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/10/why-i-hope-to-die-at-75/379329/

So I guess we know how Biden's committee (I think committees will make all decisions for him as he's never been that bright and probably entering the early stages of dementia) will recommend dealing with COVID-19... If you’re 75 or older (you know… feeble, ineffectual and pathetic) and contract the virus it’s hasta la vista baby.

DeanAustin

Poldsgold wrote: »

They were saying that in the first year, as he was largely just continuing Obama's policies. In November 2017, he started enacting more of his own policies like the billionaire tax cut. And for people like you, it has been the man thing to try and brag about with his presidency and rush to claim was all down to him, him, him:


*Note - Obama achieved more in his first four years on the stock market than Trump, increasing it by 65%. Under Trump, it has never even reached 50% improvement, is now less than 10% improved, and in a few days will likely have gone down from when he took office. A failure.


*Note - the labour participation rate has never come close to 'record breaking' under Trump's presidency, and by his own metrics unemployment is at about 35%.


Say bye-bye to all of those, "Trumps actions" as you were so quick and eager to claim aren't looking so hot right now, eh?


Say bye-bye to those too. Seems all Trump really had to do was not encourage such wildly volatile markets, and to be prepared for situations like this - Obama's numbers managed just fine despite dealing with the N1H1 virus.

Stocks are now at 21,200 - a drop of about 1,250 more and the stock market is in worse shape than Obama left it. Stocks dropped 2,352 points today (9.99% of the total) - along with yesterday and Monday, these are the three biggest single day point losses ever recorded on Wall Street,

Fact is, unless the Dow Jones hits 33,000 by November, Trump is a failure on the economy when compared with Clinton or Obama. I can see why this is a reality you would rather ignore, despite spending the last few years like a smitten schoolgirl, claiming it was all thanks to Donald Trump.

I dislike Trump but this is absolute nonsense barely worth a reply.

When Obama took charge, markets were after plunging. They had to go up. Not to say he didn't do a good job but they were always going to bounce.

The market went to record levels under Trump who was coming from a much higher base. That growth has been halted and reversed by an event completely outside of his control. His policies, like the tax cut, helped drive massive growth in the market. To not acknowledge that or claim he needs to get the Dow to 33,000 to be considered a success is agenda driven nonsense.

notobtuse

notobtuse wrote: »

Joe Biden has announced the creation of a “Public Health Advisory Committee.” Yippee! Does anybody think Biden’s committee will serve any purpose other than second guessing the Trump administration’s actions and then complaining to the media?

And guess who’s on the committee? Ezekiel Emanuel, a prime architect of Obamacare. And Emanuel thinks everyone should want to die by age 75.

Something he wrote a couple years ago:



https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/10/why-i-hope-to-die-at-75/379329/

So I guess we know how Biden's committee (I think committees will make all decisions for him as he's never been that bright and probably entering the early stages of dementia) will recommend dealing with COVID-19... If you’re 75 or older (you know… feeble, ineffectual and pathetic) and contract the virus it’s hasta la vista baby.

Hey Obtuse, I imagine many of us watched the press conference this evening. It's not a matter of second guessing, the administrations incompetence was on display this evening but not only that, their policies over the last few years has left the nation entirely unprepared.

It's pretty clear that they don't have any proper idea of how many people have the coronavirus. Basically, the likes of the UK and US which you'd expect to be most capable of coping with these situation are not able to cope with it. Now let's watch your president get cranky cause he's incompetent and has endangered plenty of lives.


https://twitter.com/NewsHour/status/1238572800186757120

notobtuse

Deleted User wrote: »

Hey Obtuse, I imagine many of us watched the press conference this evening. It's not a matter of second guessing, the administrations incompetence was on display this evening but not only that, their policies over the last few years has left the nation entirely unprepared.

It's pretty clear that they don't have any proper idea of how many people have the coronavirus. Basically, the likes of the UK and US which you'd expect to be most capable of coping with these situation are not able to cope with it. Now let's watch your president get cranky cause he's incompetent and has endangered plenty of lives.


https://twitter.com/NewsHour/status/1238572800186757120

Ah, the democrats’ misleading coronavirus talking points claims. Got to love the laziness of some of our posters and their ‘likers.’ Never let a crisis go to waste, eh?

Yes, John Bolton (not Trump) did indeed eliminate a key position that would have been involved in pandemic response.

Now you can correctly claim that Trump’s budget proposals have called for reduced funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, but Congress hasn’t enacted those cuts. In fact the CDC’s operating budgets has actually gone up in 2020 over 2019 under the president.

So, read the truth for yourself (and it comes from a source considered to be liberal/left and not a friend of Trump)...

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/democrats-misleading-coronavirus-claims/

duploelabs

notobtuse wrote: »

Ah, the democrats’ misleading coronavirus talking points claims. Got to love the laziness of some of our posters and their ‘likers.’ Never let a crisis go to waste, eh?

Yes, John Bolton (not Trump) did indeed eliminate a key position that would have been involved in pandemic response.

Now you can correctly claim that Trump’s budget proposals have called for reduced funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, but Congress hasn’t enacted those cuts. In fact the CDC’s operating budgets has actually gone up in 2020 over 2019 under the president.

So, read the truth for yourself (and it comes from a source considered to be liberal/left and not a friend of Trump)...

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/democrats-misleading-coronavirus-claims/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-fire-pandemic-team/

Trump's team oversaw the the dismantling of the CDC.
As the sign on Truman's desk said 'The Buck Stops Here'.
Cop on

notobtuse

duploelabs wrote: »

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-fire-pandemic-team/

Trump's team oversaw the the dismantling of the CDC.
As the sign on Truman's desk said 'The Buck Stops Here'.
Cop on

Trump's team dismantled the CDC??????? Dear gawd, when did this happen? :eek:

And here I thought the CDC was operating with an even bigger budget than in 2019, and that's before all the additional funding being brought in because of COVID-19.

duploelabs

Trump's COVID19 timeline

Jan. 22: "It's going to be just fine. We have it totally under control."

Jan. 24: "It will all work out well."

Jan. 30: "We think we have it very well under control."

Feb. 7: "… as the weather starts to warm & the virus hopefully becomes weaker, and then gone."

Feb. 10: "I think the virus is going to be -- it's going to be fine."

Feb. 14: "... we’re in very good shape."

Feb. 19: "I think it's going to work out fine."

Feb. 24: "The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA."

Feb. 25: "You may ask about the coronavirus, which is very well under control in our country. We have very few people with it ..."

Feb. 26: "Because of all we've done, the risk to the American people remains very low."

Feb. 28: "I think it's really going well."

Feb. 28: "It's going to disappear. One day, it's like a miracle, it will disappear."

Feb. 28: "This is their new hoax."

March 4: "Some people will have this at a very light level and won't even go to a doctor or hospital, and they'll get better."

March 10: "... it will go away. Just stay calm. It will go away."

March 11: "I think we're going to get through it very well."

March 12: "It's going to go away. ... The United States, because of what I did and what the administration did with
China, we have 32 deaths at this point..."

March 15: "This is a very contagious virus. It's incredible. But it's something that we have tremendous control over."

March 16: "If you're talking about the virus, no, that's not under control for any place in the world."

March 17: "I've always known this is a, this is a real, this is a pandemic … I've felt that it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic."

Boggles

It's one of the reasons Biden is either favorite or evens in the Bookies.

duploelabs

Boggles wrote: »

It's one of the reasons Biden is either favorite or evens in the Bookies.

He's gone from 7/4 to evens in a day or so

Agent Coulson

Trump just signed himself in as a War Time president and has taken over the private sector.

The dictatorship has fully started how long before postpones all elections.


Trump signs bill to take control of private sector

Donald Trump, the United States president, has announced that he will invoke a federal provision that allows the government to marshal the private sector in response to the coronavirus pandemic, the Associated Press reports.

Trump, now describing himself as a wartime president, said he would sign the Defense Production Act “in case we need it” as the government bolsters resources for an expected surge in cases of the virus.

The Defense Production Act gives the president powers to direct domestic industrial production to provide essential materials and goods needed in a national security crisis.

It allows the president to require businesses and corporations to prioritise and accept contracts for required materials and services. It also allows the president to provide incentives for the domestic industrial base to expand the production and supply of critical materials and goods, according to a March 2 report by the Congressional Research Service.

Trump also said he will expand the nation’s testing capacity and deploy a Navy hospital ship to New York City, which is rapidly becoming the centre of a pandemic that has rattled the U.S. economy and rewritten the rules of American society.

A second ship will be deployed to the West Coast.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/mar/18/coronavirus-live-news-updates-outbreak-us-states-uk-australia-europe-eu-self-isolation-lockdown-latest-update

MadYaker

It's too little too late I'm afraid. The US's fate is pretty much sealed now. They've had rampant community transmission for weeks now so all they can do at this point is wait for people to start getting sick and hope they can cope as much as possible. All the military resources should help somewhat but it's still going to be the worst humanitarian disaster ever seen in the country. Trump is done and he knows it, he can call the virus whatever he likes there's no twisting or talking this one away.

branie2

Will the election go ahead?

Bobeagleburger

MadYaker wrote: »

It's too little too late I'm afraid. The US's fate is pretty much sealed now. They've had rampant community transmission for weeks now so all they can do at this point is wait for people to start getting sick and hope they can cope as much as possible. All the military resources should help somewhat but it's still going to be the worst humanitarian disaster ever seen in the country. Trump is done and he knows it, he can call the virus whatever he likes there's no twisting or talking this one away.

Trump still the favorite with the bookies. Good money to be made if you think he won't get in.

rossie1977

6 wrote: »

Trump still the favorite with the bookies. Good money to be made if you think he won't get in.

Democrats are now favourites actually

5/6 to 10/11

branie2 wrote: »

Will the election go ahead?

Election took place in November 1944 so I would say yes

duploelabs

6 wrote: »

Trump still the favorite with the bookies. Good money to be made if you think he won't get in.

What bookies is giving you those odds? Care to send us the link? Even pp has them both evens

Bobeagleburger

rossie1977 wrote: »

Democrats are now favourites actually

5/6 to 10/11


Election took place in November 1944 so I would say yes

duploelabs wrote: »

What bookies is giving you those odds? Care to send us the link? Even pp has them both evens

Trump 2.16
Biden 2.20

Betfair

duploelabs

6 wrote: »

Trump 2.16
Biden 2.20

Betfair

Betfair are evens each currently.

Bobeagleburger

duploelabs wrote: »

Betfair are evens each currently.

The exchange is currently what I posted above.

rossie1977

Trump would still be slightly ahead because Dem race is still between 3.

Once its just Biden vs Trump head to head Biden will be clear favourite based on Biden’s momentum. Fact that Paddy Power have the Democratic candidate favourite to win right now suggests that.

MadYaker

branie2 wrote: »

Will the election go ahead?

At the moment I don't see why not but it's a long way to November. There could be real instability over there.

AllForIt

I don't think Biden has a hope. Not least because there's noting about him. Hillary was much more impressive than Biden and she had the possible first female president thing going on with her, which turned out to be not enough of an edge.

The Dems need a wow candidate like Obama and Biden falls far far short of that.

And and this virus outbreak is taking all attention away from the Dem election and is likely to do so for some time. I bet Biden is absolutely cursing the timing of it. It's not helping him that's for sure.

Frankly, Biden looks like a career politician. If Obama didn't appoint him vice he prolly never would have ran. At least Sanders looks invigorated but Biden just looks like some old fogey who is chancing his arm at the presidency. As I said, there's noting about him and I can't see the US electorate going for him over Trump.

Timberrrrrrrr

AllForIt wrote: »

I don't think Biden has a hope. Not least because there's noting about him. Hillary was much more impressive than Biden and she had the possible first female president thing going on with her, which turned out to be not enough of an edge.

The Dems need a wow candidate like Obama and Biden falls far far short of that.

And and this virus outbreak is taking all attention away from the Dem election and is likely to do so for some time. I bet Biden is absolutely cursing the timing of it. It's not helping him that's for sure.

Frankly, Biden looks like a career politician. If Obama didn't appoint him vice he prolly never would have ran. At least Sanders looks invigorated but Biden just looks like some old fogey who is chancing his arm at the presidency. As I said, there's noting about him and I can't see the US electorate going for him over Trump.

And you dont think Trump/Republicans aren't?

duploelabs

AllForIt wrote: »

I don't think Biden has a hope.

In what? The democratic nomination? Looks like he's got that in the bag. In the presidential election? The polls are saying he's a shoo in, some by even more than 10 points

Bobeagleburger

A recession will definitely be a massive negative for Trump and I can't see how will avoid one. This virus will cripple them.