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

jamule

jem wrote: »

I actually but on a bet yesterday that I realy realy hope that I lose. put a 100 on trump to win will get 230 if he wins.
Hope so so much that it is a losing bet.
But I have a sneeky feeling that between voter supression, the numbers that just watch GOP TV etc that he will make it

I took 15/8 two weeks ago, i feel durrty

briany

Trump has literally come out and said directly that if he loses in November, it will have been because the election was rigged against him. This is completely insane - he's stoking the fires of indignation in all of his supporters, and I don't think he cares if America burned with it, so long as he's safely out of harms way.

Penn

briany wrote: »

Trump has literally come out and said directly that if he loses in November, it will have been because the election was rigged against him. This is completely insane - he's stoking the fires of indignation in all of his supporters, and I don't think he cares if America burned with it, so long as he's safely out of harms way.

I say bring it on. Let him try challenge it, because I would say he'll be completely abandoned by the GOP regardless of whether they keep or lose the Senate who will instead focus on pushing through as much as possible before the inauguration.

If Trump loses, the GOP's eyes will shift to a Biden Presidency (because they know Trump will lose any challenge to the election results) and they'll start focusing on 2024.

And if Trump tries challenging the results with no backup, his futile, pathetic whining would be the perfect end to his presidency.

Leroy42

Penn wrote: »

I say bring it on. Let him try challenge it, because I would say he'll be completely abandoned by the GOP regardless of whether they keep or lose the Senate who will instead focus on pushing through as much as possible before the inauguration.

If Trump loses, the GOP's eyes will shift to a Biden Presidency (because they know Trump will lose any challenge to the election results) and they'll start focusing on 2024.

And if Trump tries challenging the results with no backup, his futile, pathetic whining would be the perfect end to his presidency.

I don't share your optimism. The example of GWB and Florida would indicate that they (and I am sure the DNC would do the same if given the chance) will do everything to try to hold onto the WH. The fact of gerrymandering would indicate that both parties are not against bending the rules to get the result they want.

And I don't think it will be as simply as simply demanding a rerun. It will be far more nuanced. Questions will be asked, already set up by Trump, about the validity of the main lin ballots. Whether the voters really meant to vote a certain way, how much fraud. Heck, even when they won in 2016, Trump floated the idea of massive voting fraud. If they lose they will push this much harder.

And the idea is not really to overturn the result, it is to delegitimize it. Such that they can then ignore anything the WH does or says on the basis that it wasn't really fair. The DNC have done a version of it with Trump, but given the experience with the GOP (not allowing SCOTUS pick etc) then I would expect it to be turned up to 11.

briany

Penn wrote: »

I say bring it on. Let him try challenge it, because I would say he'll be completely abandoned by the GOP regardless of whether they keep or lose the Senate who will instead focus on pushing through as much as possible before the inauguration.

If Trump loses, the GOP's eyes will shift to a Biden Presidency (because they know Trump will lose any challenge to the election results) and they'll start focusing on 2024.

And if Trump tries challenging the results with no backup, his futile, pathetic whining would be the perfect end to his presidency.

I would like to see Trump become politically isolated, but the man has a high approval rating among the current Republican base. If the traditional Republican establishment turns their backs on Trump, Trump will probably threaten them with cleaving the Republican party clean in two. I don't know if that's a fight the Republican higher-ups are into having. At best, I think they'd be silent on his chest-beating.

TomOnBoard

Leroy42 wrote: »

I don't share your optimism. The example of GWB and Florida would indicate that they (and I am sure the DNC would do the same if given the chance) will do everything to try to hold onto the WH. The fact of gerrymandering would indicate that both parties are not against bending the rules to get the result they want.

And I don't think it will be as simply as simply demanding a rerun. It will be far more nuanced. Questions will be asked, already set up by Trump, about the validity of the main lin ballots. Whether the voters really meant to vote a certain way, how much fraud. Heck, even when they won in 2016, Trump floated the idea of massive voting fraud. If they lose they will push this much harder.

And the idea is not really to overturn the result, it is to delegitimize it. Such that they can then ignore anything the WH does or says on the basis that it wasn't really fair. The DNC have done a version of it with Trump, but given the experience with the GOP (not allowing SCOTUS pick etc) then I would expect it to be turned up to 11.

The example of GWB and Florida is not remotely related to what Trump's loss conjures up. While the Bush/Gore showdown in FL made some of us sick at the time, it was conducted within the accepted rules and employed legal routes to a declared result. No-one intimated that his 'fine people' had 'many guns' or that the only way he would lose is that the election was rigged against him. No-one said they wanted another 4 or 8 years to be tacked on to his term to make up for legitimate Congressional and FBI investigations.

Penn

TomOnBoard wrote: »

The example of GWB and Florida is not remotely related to what Trump's loss conjures up. While the Bush/Gore showdown in FL made some of us sick at the time, it was conducted within the accepted rules and employed legal routes to a declared result. No-one intimated that his 'fine people' had 'many guns' or that the only way he would lose is that the election was rigged against him. No-one said they wanted another 4 or 8 years to be tacked on to his term to make up for legitimate Congressional and FBI investigations.

Exactly. I don't think the GOP would want to waste time helping Trump fight a battle they know they're not going to win, because Trump's base will always stay Republican anyway, and they'll have less than 3 months to try force through whatever judges/legislation they can before a Biden presidency and/or Dem Senate. Some of the GOP might publicly support Trump, but I don't think the GOP as a whole will bother throwing in behind him, because at that point it wouldn't be worth the effort. The focus will shift to hampering Biden from the off, and on mid-terms and 2024.

briany

Penn wrote: »

Exactly. I don't think the GOP would want to waste time helping Trump fight a battle they know they're not going to win, because Trump's base will always stay Republican anyway

I wouldn't be so sure about that. At least, I wouldn't say so in a general way. Trump has given voice to the darker inclinations of the Republican base (I'm not saying every Republican has these inclinations, however) that has festered under the Tea Party movement of the last decade or more and now given birth to political monster. This is the cult of Trump that has become a party within a party. The openly racist, homophobic, misogynistic, and neck deep in Facebook conspiracy theories which they share with all their friends at the gun club. Why would they go back to the Republican party when Trump so succinctly speaks for all their prejudice and proud ignorance?

Christy42

For once Trump got to fact check someone else.

He pointed out Michelle Obama had the wrong number of deaths in her speech as it was pre recorded. The number is now far worse.

Hearing someone say you've done a terrible job and countering with I have done even worse than that is an interesting tactic it has to be said.

Leroy42

TomOnBoard wrote: »

The example of GWB and Florida is not remotely related to what Trump's loss conjures up. While the Bush/Gore showdown in FL made some of us sick at the time, it was conducted within the accepted rules and employed legal routes to a declared result. No-one intimated that his 'fine people' had 'many guns' or that the only way he would lose is that the election was rigged against him. No-one said they wanted another 4 or 8 years to be tacked on to his term to make up for legitimate Congressional and FBI investigations.

Yes I know they are not the same, but they do point to, and the McConnell ruse over the SCOTUS pick for Obama is another example, how the GOP are well versed in using whatever means are available to get the result they want.

The fact that they have consistently remain silent despite the things Trump has talked about would suggest to me that that they would be prepared if they felt they could win.

The prize is so great. If Trump wins a second term then the politicalisation of the courts will be completed and remain so for may years. Not to mention that there will be probably 2 mnore SCOTUS positions opened up in the next few years (I know the Senate plays a major role too, but WH is the starting point).

So the rewards are great and the risks appear to be few since they don't seem to lose support no matter what they do

Dillonb3

briany wrote: »

I wouldn't be so sure about that. At least, I wouldn't say so in a general way. Trump has given voice to the darker inclinations of the Republican base (I'm not saying every Republican has these inclinations, however) that has festered under the Tea Party movement of the last decade or more and now given birth to political monster. This is the cult of Trump that has become a party within a party. The openly racist, homophobic, misogynistic, and neck deep in Facebook conspiracy theories which they share with all their friends at the gun club. Why would they go back to the Republican party when Trump so succinctly speaks for all their prejudice and proud ignorance?

I can see Trump's base base voting for more of these QAnon extremists. 20 of them already won their primaries and some in heavy red districts

Penn

briany wrote: »

I wouldn't be so sure about that. At least, I wouldn't say so in a general way. Trump has given voice to the darker inclinations of the Republican base (I'm not saying every Republican has these inclinations, however) that has festered under the Tea Party movement of the last decade or more and now given birth to political monster. This is the cult of Trump that has become a party within a party. The openly racist, homophobic, misogynistic, and neck deep in Facebook conspiracy theories which they share with all their friends at the gun club. Why would they go back to the Republican party when Trump so succinctly speaks for all their prejudice and proud ignorance?

They'd go back to the Republican Party because where else would they go? Plus the darker inclinations that have risen in the Republican base will lead to another Trump. But the GOP have already said in numerous ways that when more people are able to vote, they lose. Most incumbants win a second term. If Trump doesn't and the GOP try and fail to cling on to power, I think it does them more harm than good, and that they'd be more likely to hamper Biden from the off and focus on getting back in in 2024 (as Biden will be a one-term president so they have a better chance) and hoping for 8 years.

They won't kick Trump to the kerb as they'll want to retain his support (even for future elections), but trying to call the election illegimate if it's clear it's not is a battle they won't want to spend money and energy fighting on his behalf.

briany

Penn wrote: »

They'd go back to the Republican Party because where else would they go? Plus the darker inclinations that have risen in the Republican base will lead to another Trump. But the GOP have already said in numerous ways that when more people are able to vote, they lose. Most incumbants win a second term. If Trump doesn't and the GOP try and fail to cling on to power, I think it does them more harm than good, and that they'd be more likely to hamper Biden from the off and focus on getting back in in 2024 (as Biden will be a one-term president so they have a better chance) and hoping for 8 years.

They won't kick Trump to the kerb as they'll want to retain his support (even for future elections), but trying to call the election illegimate if it's clear it's not is a battle they won't want to spend money and energy fighting on his behalf.

Trump could form his own party and take a good chunk of followers with him if he feels like he's been sufficiently screwed by his party. Enough to seriously worry the Republican establishment, anyway. If the Republicans try to get another Trump on board, they potentially keep a lot of disaffected Republicans away, and replacing Trump may not be as easy as proffering someone with the same general views as him in a bit of a sleeker package. The likes of Josh Hawley do not have the kind of brand recognition that Trump has, and they never will either. So getting an in-house Trump is not, in my view, a surefire way to bring the MAGA hats back into the Republican fold proper.

As for calling the election illegitimate, the Republican party will simply do what they've done with all of Trump's mad sh*te, and that is say very little in the way of direct approval or condemnation.

Leroy42

If Trump moves party, say sets up his own MAGA party, sure some will move over with him, but IMO the majority of people vote for Trump not because of Trump, but because of what he can deliver for them. Judges, zingers, tears of libtards etc.

If he splits the GOP vote then he will get nothing, as will the GOP, and the Democrats will end up in power by default. So whilst they may wish t follow their annoited one, practicality will mean that the majority will simply stay with the GOP because hey can get things done.

Water John

Trump would set up Trump TV or take over one he already has shares in.

ArmaniJeanss

No need for him to start his own party when he can just stand in the 2024 Republican primaries, and quite plausibly win the nomination again.
Nothing in the constitution to prevent someone winning a second presidential term after a 'gap'.

Water John

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

No need for him to start his own party when he can just stand in the 2024 Republican primaries, and quite plausibly win the nomination again.
Nothing in the constitution to prevent someone winning a second presidential term after a 'gap'.

That would be Ivanka.

ancapailldorcha

Water John wrote: »

Trump would set up Trump TV or take over one he already has shares in.

It's a poor source but Michael Wolff alleges in the beginning of Fire and Fury that Trump's plan was to lose in 2016, claim that it was rigged and ride the populist wave to profits via a new Trump TV network.

As I said, it's a poor source but I thought I'd mention it.

ArmaniJeanss

Water John wrote: »

That would be Ivanka.

That may well have been the long term plan after 2 terms of tremendous Presidency from DJT.
But if he loses in 2020 I don't think he'll be able to resist looking for his own second term in 2024.

briany

Leroy42 wrote: »

If he splits the GOP vote then he will get nothing, as will the GOP, and the Democrats will end up in power by default. So whilst they may wish t follow their annoited one, practicality will mean that the majority will simply stay with the GOP because hey can get things done.

Oh, Trump will get something, alright - the continuing adoration of a cult of devoted followers, which seems like his no. 1 preoccupation. But creating a schism like that is something I think he would only pull the ripcord on if he really feels like his party isn't backing him up, or at least not working against him if he loses the election in Nov and cries foul over it.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's a poor source but Michael Wolff alleges in the beginning of Fire and Fury that Trump's plan was to lose in 2016, claim that it was rigged and ride the populist wave to profits via a new Trump TV network.

As I said, it's a poor source but I thought I'd mention it.

That rumour was floating around prior to the election as well and I'm inclined to view it as plausible. Like it'd be a step up from Trump steaks. Plus he's obsessed with the media...

pixelburp

Wasn't McConnell recently quietly telling GOP senators to drop association with Trump from their election campaigns? Trump might not read the runes but I'm damn sure McConnell and the GOP brain-trust do; if the President's purpose as the Useful Idiot truly dies in November, Trump might find himself quickly isolated by former lickspittles experiencing a timely Road to Damascus moment. Lindsey Graham might be craven in his worship of Trump but his loyalty is also demonstrably variable.

The Raging Bile Duct

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

No need for him to start his own party when he can just stand in the 2024 Republican primaries, and quite plausibly win the nomination again.
Nothing in the constitution to prevent someone winning a second presidential term after a 'gap'.

The Republican Party lose out on the hope of incumbency because he'll only be able to serve one term which makes him less attractive as a candidate.

ancapailldorcha

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

The Republican Party lose out on the hope of incumbency because he'll only be able to serve one term which make him less attractive as a candidate.

The other issue is what will he be like in four years. He has become less intelligible and less cogent bordering on rambling in a very inconsistent manner since even 2016.

I think he either wins in 2020 or there's no second term for him. He might try and run someone like his daughter as a proxy but I can't see them serving that purpose well even if they can woo the GOP base and establishment.

TomOnBoard

Water John wrote: »

Trump would set up Trump TV or take over one he already has shares in.

He'll probably licence his name to OANN so that he can get $$ from his cult followers without doing any work.

Christy42

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

That may well have been the long term plan after 2 terms of tremendous Presidency from DJT.
But if he loses in 2020 I don't think he'll be able to resist looking for his own second term in 2024.

He may try but I really doubt he will have the energy or capability. He has gotten worse in his ramblings the last few years and was already at the point where anything more than a 3 word slogan was a struggle for him then.

He was proud of passing an exam for checking if you have dementia but thought some of the questions were hard.

As for Ivanka. Many Republicans will want her. I am not sure if she wants the attention again and even then while some will want the Trump brand she doesn't have the same ability to play to his base while being associated with all his flaws. Finally I think any female candidate will dampen the Republican base. If she tries the same firebrand style she will be seen as "nasty" or angry by some of that base and lose those votes.

banie01

When you think that Trumpism and its cultish lunacy can't ascend any further levels of absurdity...
The GOP finds a way to actually pole vault any bar of taste, political correctness or indeed just actual consensus!

The 2 St Louis lawyers who decided to protect their property from a group of BLM protesters by waving guns around the place!
Are going to endorse Don at the RNC congress.

Overheal

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's a poor source but Michael Wolff alleges in the beginning of Fire and Fury that Trump's plan was to lose in 2016, claim that it was rigged and ride the populist wave to profits via a new Trump TV network.

As I said, it's a poor source but I thought I'd mention it.

It's what we all thought was happening in 2016 to be sure.

check_six

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember in the last few days before the 2016 election yer man was calling for armed insurrection if he did not win. It was combined with calls that the vote was fraudulent. The voter fraud message got more traction, but there was a demand to get shooty treasonous too. I couldn't understand why this wasn't made more of at the time.

This November I'm expecting more of the same in the dying days of the campaign. What could this lead to? Will we see armed militias 'protecting' voting centres? These are grim times.

check_six

banie01 wrote: »

When you think that Trumpism and its cultish lunacy can't ascend any further levels of absurdity...
The GOP finds a way to actually pole vault any bar of taste, political correctness or indeed just actual consensus!

The 2 St Louis lawyers who decided to protect their property from a group of BLM protesters by waving guns around the place!
Are going to endorse Don at the RNC congress.

I'm stunned. Mostly at myself for not being able to predict how barrel scrapingly awful the GOP campaign could get. It should have been obvious. Hope this pair have read up on some firearms safety since their last foray. If you review the video, they spent more time pointing their guns at each other than anyone else! I'm going to forecast that one of them shoots off a toe trying to reholster a gun mid-rant/speech.