US Presidential Election 2020 Thread II - Judgement Day(s)

BonnieSituation

prawnsambo wrote: »

South Dakota now certified. That makes five. Tick tock.

With Wyoming, Oklahoma and South Carolina all certified as well I'm surprised he hasn't shouted "Stop the Certifications".

Irish Praetorian

Blowfish wrote: »

It's possible alright that they'd be uncomfortable with it, but from everything I've seen (even as someone who often disagrees majorly with how the US military is used), the US military would be extremely unwilling to involve themselves and would always defer to the courts as the ones responsible for resolving any disputes or issues with elections.

Now, the one caveat is that the military will obey all legal orders from the president and while I'd agree with Manic that they'd quite happily down tools on Jan 20th if instructed to, there are still plenty of 'legal' orders that would cause havok before then. Hypothetically (though I'm no lawyer so could be way off), Trump could state that the 'election fraud' is depriving people of their constitutionally protected rights, hence under the Insurrection Act (third bullet point here) he is mobilising the National Guard and ordering them to 'secure' the counting locations. I don't envy the situation that'd stick the top end of the US military in were that to happen.

That would, from what I've seen and from what I'm hearing on here, be what I'm inclined to believe as well, although I'm not sure to what extent a court ruling could sway matters, unless its taken seriously at the highest levels. Of course, in a tense situation, what exactly constitutes the highest levels would be up for interpretation.

Ultimately, I'm not sure how pleasing it is to know that the US military would tend, in most circumstances, towards non-intervention. It doesn't seem like much of an issue when things are working well, and what becomes of Trump might well serve as a forceful reminder of that. However, some of the deeper structural issues like a Senate which is by design non representative, an Executive branch which can (and has) quite easily be obtained by the smaller vote tally, a Judiciary which relies on the former two and a lower legislative branch that has it's own issues with gerrymandering and loss of respect, when combined with a strictly neutral military, seem to provide a recipe for a very dangerous situation. The kind of pressures that can build up when a government cannot represent the people it purports to and leave no response but violence available, could lead to the kind of civil-military conflict which the policy of neutrality would purport to avoid. One might really hope that the US tries to make some progress in modernising some of its political structures in the near future, before another popular vote loss for example, causes more strain.

everlast75

A link to one of the court hearings.


https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1326624975655215108?s=19

It is *not* going well for Trump.

"Attorney David Fink for Detroit is up:

"By now, we've seen this before..."

"It's starting to feel a little bit like Groundhog Day, but unlike Groundhog Day, this isn't funny at all."

Itssoeasy

The transcript of one of other cases does really show how much they’ll try and twist themselves in knots. The one where the answer was “non zero people” beats all. Someone should get the board from father Ted with reality and imagination on it. And throw in the small and far away line to try for him and his supporters get the message.

It’s over and he won’t be president past January 20th of next year. I also don’t believe he’ll run again in 2024, because as bad as he is now mentally, he’s not getting better so four more years won’t improve his mental state.

Itssoeasy

I have to laugh and also shake my head at the progressive wing of the Democratic Party scrolling through Twitter. They are highlighting measures passed in several states on Election Day which should be welcomed, but how did the progressive wing do in house and senate races ? They struck out when you compare it to the pre election predictions.

I’m someone who would be in favour of most of what they stand for, but their messaging is awful at times. If they ever want to bring about the change they want at a national level they need to be willing to adapt their message to fit the electorate they are trying to get votes from. They are too easy for the conservative media and GOP to lump together. And it would seem that “centrist” is a term of derision amongst them. Nothing wrong with being a centrist imo. They criticise the GOP and rightly so on many issues but they need to look in the mirror and realise not being the GOP isn’t a good policy position.

So, this post and my last few shouldn’t be taken as a criticism of the democrats as a whole or any one part of it, but more annoyance at the fact that America as a whole seems to be moving towards the left but that can’t lead to complacency from the left. And for Christ sake can they stop the purity test they do. As was pointed out the GOP while having a shrinking base, will vote for a brick if it’s got an R next to it’s name. The democrats don’t do that and they need to do it more.

listermint

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I have to laugh and also shake my head at the progressive wing of the Democratic Party scrolling through Twitter. They are highlighting measures passed in several states on Election Day which should be welcomed, but how did the progressive wing do in house and senate races ? They struck out when you compare it to the pre election predictions.

I’m someone who would be in favour of most of what they stand for, but their messaging is awful at times. If they ever want to bring about the change they want at a national level they need to be willing to adapt their message to fit the electorate they are trying to get votes from. They are too easy for the conservative media and GOP to lump together. And it would seem that “centrist” is a term of derision amongst them. Nothing wrong with being a centrist imo. They criticise the GOP and rightly so on many issues but they need to look in the mirror and realise not being the GOP isn’t a good policy position.

So, this post and my last few shouldn’t be taken as a criticism of the democrats as a whole or any one part of it, but more annoyance at the fact that America as a whole seems to be moving towards the left but that can’t lead to complacency from the left. And for Christ sake can they stop the purity test they do. As was pointed out the GOP while having a shrinking base, will vote for a brick if it’s got an R next to it’s name. The democrats don’t do that and they need to do it more.

They won all but 1 seat.

They are better at reaching out to their base than any other group in the dem party.

eire4

listermint wrote: »

They won all but 1 seat.

They are better at reaching out to their base than any other group in the dem party.

I would also add that poor messaging is a Democratic wide problem. Whether its actual left leaning Democrats or right leaning corporate Democrats it has long been a big Democratic weakness. Made even worse because coming up with catchy slogans and phrases that stick and work for them sadly has long been a Republican strength.

Itssoeasy

listermint wrote: »

They won all but 1 seat.

They are better at reaching out to their base than any other group in the dem party.

So I’m completely wrong then.

listermint

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So I’m completely wrong then.

Pretty much. The statistics don't back up the claim unfortunately.

These will be a very powerful force in getting the numbers for Georgia. Tactically they've been excellent. Getting people energised at the doors etc

eire4

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So I’m completely wrong then.

Yes the progressives in the Democratic party did well retaining almost all their seats.

eire4

listermint wrote: »

Pretty much. The statistics don't back up the claim unfortunately.

These will be a very powerful force in getting the numbers for Georgia. Tactically they've been excellent. Getting people energised at the doors etc

That is correct they played a big role in places like Detroit, Philadelphia, Milwaukee and many other urban areas. What worries me is that the Corporate Democrats who control the party will now start demonizing them in their own form of purity test. Plus on top of that they will do little of any note to fundamentally reform the police in the US and thus lose a good portion of the black vote which was very energized in this election following on from the protests against police brutalities and murders throughout much of 2020.

Itssoeasy

listermint wrote: »

Pretty much. The statistics don't back up the claim unfortunately.

These will be a very powerful force in getting the numbers for Georgia. Tactically they've been excellent. Getting people energised at the doors etc

Well then I’ll stop making posts on them. No point in being wrong. Well it’s clear we disagree not on what they do but how they do it. I will say that the democrats as a whole didn’t have a good night and lost seats in the house and may take control of the senate but as a whole(which is where we have confusion over the all bar one line) which includes the progressive wing didn’t perform like they wanted to or needed to.

listermint

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Well then I’ll stop making posts on them. No point in being wrong. Well it’s clear we disagree not on what they do but how they do it. I will say that the democrats as a whole didn’t have a good night and lost seats in the house and may take control of the senate but as a whole(which is where we have confusion over the all bar one line) which includes the progressive wing didn’t perform like they wanted to or needed to.

Perhaps if the rest of the party particularly the whingers that are going on about the lost seats connected with their voters the same way ?

Because they're doing something wrong entirely and blaming half your own party for your complete ineptitude isn't going to win 2024.

Itssoeasy

eire4 wrote: »

That is correct they played a big role in places like Detroit, Philadelphia, Milwaukee and many other urban areas. What worries me is that the Corporate Democrats who control the party will now start demonizing them in their own form of purity test. Plus on top of that they will do little of any note to fundamentally reform the police in the US and thus lose a good portion of the black vote which was very energized in this election following on from the protests against police brutalities and murders throughout much of 2020.

I don’t see it as demonising progressives but it’s clear one wing of the party is annoyed at the other because of the seats lost which I suppose is understandable between now and January given democrats who lost their seats will still be in Congress. If it goes on past January then it won’t be a good look. But anyway I said I wouldn’t be commenting on progressives specifically.

Itssoeasy

listermint wrote: »

Perhaps if the rest of the party particularly the whingers that are going on about the lost seats connected with their voters the same way ?

Because they're doing something wrong entirely and blaming half your own party for your complete ineptitude isn't going to win 2024.

Well I think those who lost their seats see the problem(rightly or wrongly)as having being cast as a progressive when they weren’t which works against them because their GOP opponent could use the same old talking points against them. Conor lamb of Pennsylvania who won a seat nearly lost his seat yet he isn’t a progressive but played the field he had and moved on certain issues and had a great win last time.

Well complete ineptitude is bit strong as is whingers. It’s understandable to feel pissed off when you’ve lost your seat. Both sides need to stop blaming each other.

eire4

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I don’t see it as demonising progressives but it’s clear one wing of the party is annoyed at the other because of the seats lost which I suppose is understandable between now and January given democrats who lost their seats will still be in Congress. If it goes on past January then it won’t be a good look. But anyway I said I wouldn’t be commenting on progressives specifically.

Well we can chose whatever words we want but the corporate Democrats who are constantly pointing fingers at progressives about purity tests are basically doing the same themselves instead of looking in the mirror and accepting that while they have some legitimate grips with progressives they have to accept that they have contributed to the problem as well. But the corporate Democrats never seem willing to look in the mirror and accept any blame themselves.

Itssoeasy

eire4 wrote: »

Well we can chose whatever words we want but the corporate Democrats who are constantly pointing fingers at progressives about purity tests are basically doing the same themselves instead of looking in the mirror and accepting that while they have some legitimate grips with progressives they have to accept that they have contributed to the problem as well. But the corporate Democrats never seem willing to look in the mirror and accept any blame themselves.

Democrats as a whole need to do be willing to accept blame. 2022 isn’t that far away and the republicans have increased their seats this time around and will be looking to take back control of the house. The democrats need to focus and try and work as one party, albeit with different groups in it because if the republicans take back the house and if they keep the senate this time around then whatever agenda progressives or as you call them corporate democrats won’t be getting any of it through.

eire4

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Democrats as a whole need to do be willing to accept blame. 2022 isn’t that far away and the republicans have increased their seats this time around and will be looking to take back control of the house. The democrats need to focus and try and work as one party, albeit with different groups in it because if the republicans take back the house and if they keep the senate this time around then whatever agenda progressives or as you call them corporate democrats won’t be getting any of it through.

The bigger issue with 2022 is that redistricting will happen next year and it will happen again with Republicans in control of most of it because they control most state legislatures across the US. But even more serious the Republicans now all but own the supreme court as a backstop to allow them to rule even as a minority party. The supreme court will no doubt start stripping away whats left of the voting rights act and will no doubt allow Republicans to go on a gerrymandering spree that will make 2010 look like a warm up. That IMHO is the Democrats biggest hurdle in terms of 2022 and retaining control of the house.

TomOnBoard

eire4 wrote: »

The bigger issue with 2022 is that redistricting will happen next year and it will happen again with Republicans in control of most of it because they control most state legislatures across the US. But even more serious the Republicans now all but own the supreme court as a backstop to allow them to rule even as a minority party. The supreme court will no doubt start stripping away whats left of the voting rights act and will no doubt allow Republicans to go on a gerrymandering spree that will make 2010 look like a warm up. That IMHO is the Democrats biggest hurdle in terms of 2022 and retaining control of the house.

Democrats really need to work on the fact that, despite having larger numbers of registered voters than Republicans in Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Michigan, they control none of those legislatures. A massive voter drive, and associated voting education , such as was led by Stacy Abrams in Georgia, has to be a huge priority now. Re-districting and gerrymandering that have been the hallmarks of the last decade have got to be managed and voter suppression and disenfranchisement battled at every turn.

In addition, HONEST internal examination of why Dems did not convert a Biden win into Senate and House improvements is needed. Blaming one wing of the party or the other will just alienate and frustrate. Was a considerable amount of Biden's vote attributable to Reps who could no longer hold their nose(s) and vote for Trump? Failure to understand why those of Cuban and Venezuelan heritage voted for Trump, along with many of Mexican heritage in more rural areas of Texas will hold them back next time as well, and many other times thereafter. The GOP messaging that frightened folks in those areas away from Democratic policies needs attention. Clear education as to what elements of Democratic Socialism and other hot-button issues are supported by the Party needs to be simply explained. Their messaging has been all over the place on these, which allowed the GOP spin doctors to spin the confusion against Dems, as spin doctors are paid to do.

Manic Moran

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Intriguing, and I'm glad I held fire on my weekend-warrior quip, because from what you describe it really sounds like the National Guard is a lot more capable as a fighting force than most people might realize. I would almost be concerned given the kind of regional affiliation you describe, but I presume from what you say and don't say, that the NG has, like the Army, a bit of a Republican lean in its membership.

In any case, I appreciate the insights; you're an utter wellspring of knowledge on the topic. You know if you had the time, you should get yourself a YT channel, do some videos on this kinda stuff.

Correct. The Abrams Doctrine is the result of Vietnam: A large portion (Somewhere over half) of the US's conventional military capability is in the reserves. The intent is that the US cannot go to war unless it's willing to take folks out of the civilian workforce with the accompanying political and economic issues, so most of us have either gone on deployment (twice in my case) or expect to. Yes, Guardsmen lean Republican.

I have a YT channel, 173K subscribers thus far.

They won all but 1 seat.

They are better at reaching out to their base than any other group in the dem party.

Yes, but 'where' is the question? Look at "The Squad," for example. Not to put a disservice to the others, but still. Saying that they won re-election is hardly a high bar. Omar's seat has been Democrat since 1963. Pressley's since 1923. There hasn't been a Republican in Tlaib's seat since 1929. AOC's is far more recent, the 1980s, but it's about as safe as a house now regardless.

The names you want to look at are the folks who flipped Republican seats to Democrat. Carolyn Bourdeaux, Kathy Manning, Deborah Ross. Did they do so because they were progressive and drew out their base, or did they do so because they were less so, and didn't turn off the voters in Georgia and North Carolina where they won their seats? Keeping the seats they have is good. Turning the seats they don't have is better.

Irish Praetorian

Manic Moran wrote: »

I have a YT channel, 173K subscribers thus far.

Yes I know, I was being jocular

And before you say I didnt know and Im just being prideful now, I got a two word shibboleth;

Sloped armour.

That aside, I know its early days but what do you imagine is the prognosis for 2020? I know a lot rides on Trumps actions but I feel like there could be a red miniwave off the back of orange man being gone (dampening Democrat turnout) and the long after effects of covid.

BluePlanet

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yes, but 'where' is the question? Look at "The Squad," for example. Not to put a disservice to the others, but still. Saying that they won re-election is hardly a high bar. Omar's seat has been Democrat since 1963. Pressley's since 1923. There hasn't been a Republican in Tlaib's seat since 1929. AOC's is far more recent, the 1980s, but it's about as safe as a house now regardless.

The names you want to look at are the folks who flipped Republican seats to Democrat. Carolyn Bourdeaux, Kathy Manning, Deborah Ross. Did they do so because they were progressive and drew out their base, or did they do so because they were less so, and didn't turn off the voters in Georgia and North Carolina where they won their seats? Keeping the seats they have is good. Turning the seats they don't have is better.

Why vote for Republican Lite when there's a real Republican on the ticket?
It's basically pitching to the same group of voters.
If the Dems want to flip seats, they have to grow the vote.
Progressive policies do that.

BluePlanet

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Democrats really need to work on the fact that, despite having larger numbers of registered voters than Republicans in Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Michigan, they control none of those legislatures. A massive voter drive, and associated voting education , such as was led by Stacy Abrams in Georgia, has to be a huge priority now. Re-districting and gerrymandering that have been the hallmarks of the last decade have got to be managed and voter suppression and disenfranchisement battled at every turn.

In addition, HONEST internal examination of why Dems did not convert a Biden win into Senate and House improvements is needed. Blaming one wing of the party or the other will just alienate and frustrate. Was a considerable amount of Biden's vote attributable to Reps who could no longer hold their nose(s) and vote for Trump? Failure to understand why those of Cuban and Venezuelan heritage voted for Trump, along with many of Mexican heritage in more rural areas of Texas will hold them back next time as well, and many other times thereafter. The GOP messaging that frightened folks in those areas away from Democratic policies needs attention. Clear education as to what elements of Democratic Socialism and other hot-button issues are supported by the Party needs to be simply explained. Their messaging has been all over the place on these, which allowed the GOP spin doctors to spin the confusion against Dems, as spin doctors are paid to do.

FL passed a ballot initiative for a $15 minimum wage.
That's a Bernie Sanders policy, why wasn't it a Democratic Party one?
FL went for Trump.
What lessons can one draw from this?
Biden was another low energy, unpopular candidate and i think he was toxic to down ballot Dems.

CrabRevolution

BluePlanet wrote: »

FL passed a ballot initiative for a $15 minimum wage.
That's a Bernie Sanders policy, why wasn't it a Democratic Party one?
FL went for Trump.
What lessons can one draw from this?
Biden was another low energy, unpopular candidate and i think he was toxic to down ballot Dems.

That's a strange term to describe the man who just won the US Presidential election.

The Raging Bile Duct

CrabRevolution wrote: »

That's a strange term to describe the man who just won the US Presidential election.

And one that got the most votes of any presidential candidate ever.

jam_mac_jam

BluePlanet wrote: »

FL passed a ballot initiative for a $15 minimum wage.
That's a Bernie Sanders policy, why wasn't it a Democratic Party one?
FL went for Trump.
What lessons can one draw from this?
Biden was another low energy, unpopular candidate and i think he was toxic to down ballot Dems.

That's the type of issues that they should be focusing on but they won't as they are becoming the party of the rich. Then they are shocked that they are losing votes to the Republicans.

They have no policy to benefit normal people. The traditional voters of the democrats are leaving them. Same as Labour in the UK, become the party of the middle class and you loose a lot of voters as you aren't addressing their concerns anymore.

Carfacemandog

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

Given their record, why would you trust Project Veritas or anybody involved with them?

They have a proven record of fraudulent claims.

Because the lies are convenient. Even though those posting them are fully aware they are lies, they are indeed convenient.

BluePlanet

CrabRevolution wrote: »

That's a strange term to describe the man who just won the US Presidential election.

He is squeaking by against an unpopular President in the middle of a pandemic that Trump has failed to manage.
How much of a tailwind does Biden really need?

If Biden was popular, can you explain why Dems are loosing down ballot races?

BluePlanet

On the question of how a Biden win didn't translate to a blue wave down ballot:

Unfortunately, Biden’s campaign may have a lot to do with that. The central theme of Biden’s campaign and of the Democratic National Convention was that Donald Trump is a uniquely malignant figure, that many Republican legislators would be happy to be rid of him to work with Democrats, that Biden himself is uniquely situated to work across the aisle with the opposition, and that Democrats need to come together with Republicans to compromise to solve problems.

Whether made out of conviction or political convenience, that message is explicitly tailored to give conservative-leaning voters permission to abandon Trump at the top of the ticket, but to keep voting for Republicans down the ballot. Which appears to be exactly what happened.

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2020/11/08/biden-won-big-but-his-approach-may-have-cost-democrats-downballot/

Quin_Dub

eire4 wrote: »

Yes the progressives in the Democratic party did well retaining almost all their seats.

It's a little more nuanced than that though.

Yes , the progressive candidates did do well , but there is no question that the existence of those progressive candidates damaged the more moderate candidates in Red States.

Granted, it was driven largely by an irrational "red under the bed" style fear , but the impact was real.

They need to do a better job of breaking down that fear among Moderate/Slightly right voters that they are not going to ban religion etc. etc. etc.

Yes , obviously and objectively they are not , but the GOP have done frankly a brilliant job of smearing the entire Democratic party with this "Radical left" brush.