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

briany

Retr0gamer wrote: »

And there's a good example of the GOP slander working on you. Only someone listening to their slander would call a moderate like AOC an extremist. An extremist is a neo-nazi, communism, white supremacist, the fecking taliban. Even calling her a 'left of center extremist' is a total oxymoron. Left of center is moderate. Always has been.

Yeah, one of the aggravating trends that's been happening in western politics is right-wingers coming in and insisting that they are centrists and then pointing at centrists as being left-wing, and people to the left of that as being the extreme left. It's a transparent attempt by a very frightened political right to drag the Overton window back toward themselves. They're not arguing why their ideas are better. They're just trying to scare people away from those to the left of them, which is virtually everyone.

Manic Moran

BluePlanet wrote: »

Why vote for Republican Lite when there's a real Republican on the ticket?

Don't know. Why not see what the exit polling said in GA7, NC2 or NC6? That's assuming that the "republican lites" in question agree with your characterization of them.

It's basically pitching to the same group of voters.

No, but there is certainly overlap. You know, the guys who don't always vote party ticket.

If the Dems want to flip seats, they have to grow the vote.
Progressive policies do that.

If last week's election is anything to go by, apparently so do non-progressive policies. Both sides had stunning turnouts. It still comes down to the swingable folks. Maybe in a few years the demographics will change that, but we're nowhere near there yet.

I submit that folks really want to pay attention to Montana. Bullock was a very popular Governor, a "democrat lite" to use your term (they prefer "Blue Dog"). Yet, somehow, when it came to putting the Democrat into the Senate, he lost fairly badly. Either the voters suddenly decided that by moving from one office down to another office he was far more objectionable in himself which seems unlikely, or they did not want the larger Democrat machine to control the Senate. In Montana, Bullock's policies were fine for Montanans. They apparently had no confidence that Bullock's policies would survive in D.C.

Meanwhile, Gianforte moved the other direction, trading his D.C. office for the Governorship. He included such famous hardline Republican talking points as "More focus on rehabilitation and less on incarceration", whilst Cooney who should have been able to run on the success of the moderate Democrat governor's mansion (He was Lt Gov) suffered a damaging primary from Williams, who, playing for the Democrat vote as would be expected in a Democrat primary, forced the discussion more to the left. Williams lost, but the damage was done.

Frank Bullitt

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1326926226888544256

The all caps is out in force.

I think we can expect more of this for the last months of his term.

everlast75

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1326926226888544256

The all caps is out in force.

I think we can expect more of this for the last months of his term.

I reported it.

I hope others did too.

Meanwhile, Trump's lawyers are telling the court that because they used a captcha, the affidavits must be real


https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1326933293292466179?s=19

Brussels Sprout

briany wrote: »

Yeah, one of the aggravating trends that's been happening in western politics is right-wingers coming in and insisting that they are centrists and then pointing at centrists as being left-wing, and people to the left of that as being the extreme left. It's a transparent attempt by a very frightened political right to drag the Overton window back toward themselves. They're not arguing why their ideas are better. They're just trying to scare people away from those to the left of them, which is virtually everyone.

Classic home-grown example of exactly that trick. Refers to himself has a "moderate centrist" in his bio. The content of his feed could only be described as far-right.

jem

BluePlanet wrote: »

Which is largely what i posted from the article earlier
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=115265177&postcount=5902

Republicans basically put Biden in the Presidents seat.
The Democratic Party have failed in 2020 (again).

And they will fail again at midterms if they don't start adopting Progressive policies.
FL voted for a $15 minimum wage, that is a progressive policy.
Marijuana ballot initiatives win every time they are put to vote, another progressive policy.
How could these not be included in Dem platform?
Medicare for All is popular https://pbs.twimg.com/media/El7sbBXWkAg_gG1?format=jpg&name=small

while the "left" in USA is in general nowhere near the left in countries like Ireland etc the reality is that the vast majority of people dont agree with them.
That makes them unelectable in the majority of places.
Take here for example pbf get elected in specific areas of the country but there is no way that they would even get their deposit in the vast majorioty of constituencies in Ireland.
Likewise the "squad" may get elected in the poorer areas of the cities in USA but not a hope in the majority of states. This is the same BYTW with the far right.
Look at labour in Uk under T Blair they were centre left and they won 3 elections. moved further left and their seats went straight down.

Most people want people of the centre- slightly centre left or slightly centre right and thats where the votes are. The strange thing is that if you dont get the votes you dont get elected and if you dont get elected you get none of your policies through.

BluePlanet

jem wrote: »

while the "left" in USA is in general nowhere near the left in countries like Ireland etc the reality is that the vast majority of people dont agree with them.
That makes them unelectable in the majority of places.
Take here for example pbf get elected in specific areas of the country but there is no way that they would even get their deposit in the vast majorioty of constituencies in Ireland.
Likewise the "squad" may get elected in the poorer areas of the cities in USA but not a hope in the majority of states. This is the same BYTW with the far right.
Look at labour in Uk under T Blair they were centre left and they won 3 elections. moved further left and their seats went straight down.

Most people want people of the centre- slightly centre left or slightly centre right and thats where the votes are. The strange thing is that if you dont get the votes you dont get elected and if you dont get elected you get none of your policies through.

Obama was elected on a progressive platform.
Later it was found out to be all bluster.
The 2 parties essentially pitch to the same voters, but there are vast numbers of non-voters that are not engaged, at least not regularly. That is where right or left can grow their vote.

everlast75

Trump's response to the pandemic continues to be stellar..


https://twitter.com/PeterAlexander/status/1326941473649070086?s=20


I can see Biden using this as a stick to beat the GOP with for some time.... and with good cause too!

StringerBell

I see one of the legal teams have withdrawn in Arizona, another step closer to getting the man baby to accept his fate. Have you ever in your life heard as much rubbish as wanting to give super tough business man in his 70s "time to get over it" Jesus h Christ

prawnsambo

So in Georgia they are alleging that a certain number of non-citizens are voting in Georgia (based on no actual evidence bar a nationwide study a few years ago) and that specific counties should therefore be excluded because... reasons.

Foxtrol

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I completely agree with you, they are much better for normal people then the republicans but that's not what they are focusing on.
I cannot understand why anyone who is not a millionaire would vote republican. That's not what they are campaigning on.

They should be focusing on medicare for all, debit forgiveness, fair rights for workers. For medical care know Obama did try to address and Hillary years ago. But they need to stop being scared they are going to be called communists as the republicans will do that anyway. They are going further towards republican light. Biden said in the campaign that affordable health care was a right for all, not healthcare.

This post is an example as why the left of the dem party struggles, it is the lack of understanding that a lot of voters won't vote for a candidate or party that is going against a certain core issues for them, even if they agree with some or many of their other policies.

Whether it is abortion, gun rights, their current healthcare insurance, defunding military/policing, racial justice, or gay/trans acknowledgement. Many of those are purity test red lines for 'progressives', while at the same time they are red lines for voters as reasons why they will not vote for a politician.

prawnsambo

Things are going from ridiculous to even more ridiculous:

Meanwhile over in Maricopa county, we have CAPTCHA being touted as a method of weeding out the true from the false when it comes to affidavits

An Ciarraioch

Will the Democratic leadership pay more heed to Beto than they would to AOC?

https://twitter.com/PatrickSvitek/status/1326965359744864257

BonnieSituation

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Will the Democratic leadership pay more heed to Beto than they would to AOC?

https://twitter.com/PatrickSvitek/status/1326965359744864257

They need to listen to both

everlast75

Looks like he's going to push it all the way to the electoral college *eek*

https://twitter.com/Laurie_Garrett/status/1326989666055299074?s=19

Itssoeasy

everlast75 wrote: »

Looks like he's going to push it all the way to the electoral college *eek*

https://twitter.com/Laurie_Garrett/status/1326989666055299074?s=19

Well America won’t be able to lecture other countries(even when what they’re saying is true) now, because those countries can just point on how much of a mess the American election was. That trump guy that’s now in the pentagon seems like a piece of work. Is he there past the inauguration or is he there to cause a mess for 70 days ?

BonnieSituation

everlast75 wrote: »

Looks like he's going to push it all the way to the electoral college *eek*

https://twitter.com/Laurie_Garrett/status/1326989666055299074?s=19

So they're going after faithless electors because they want to overturn the result?

I thought they were winning Georgia, Arizona and Wisconsin.

It's hard to keep up.

The increasing desperation sounds like the last days in the bunker.

TomOnBoard

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Will the Democratic leadership pay more heed to Beto than they would to AOC?

https://twitter.com/PatrickSvitek/status/1326965359744864257

That remains to be seen. However, unless there's a sea-change in attitude at the DNC and upper echelons, I believe they'll see constructive/ honest criticism, whether from AOC or Beto as an attack and will ignore it.

TomOnBoard

BonnieSituation wrote: »

So they're going after faithless electors because they want to overturn the result?

I thought they were winning Georgia, Arizona and Wisconsin.

It's hard to keep up.

The increasing desperation sounds like the last days in the bunker.

Going after total confusion and FUD leading to Electoral College chaos is all part of the Plan B that Team Trump has been following since Nov 4, prepared months in advance. Its not increasing desperation- its Plan B playing out. Plan B is ALL about forcing the Presidency to be decided in a House vote in January 2021. At that time, the votes will work on the basis of each State having a single vote, decided by the majority representation of parties. While Dems will have a majority of seats in the House, that is irrelevant- Reps are the majority party in the majority of States.

That's the Trump Team objective. Whether it succeeds or not remains to be seen.

BonnieSituation

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector

It seems like a monumental ask to try and get less than 270 electors to vote for Biden based on the States above.

It just doesn't seem at all likely.

Foxtrol

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Going after total confusion and FUD leading to Electoral College chaos is all part of the Plan B that Team Trump has been following since Nov 4, prepared months in advance. Its not increasing desperation- its Plan B playing out. Plan B is ALL about forcing the Presidency to be decided in a House vote in January 2021. At that time, the votes will work on the basis of each State having a single vote, decided by the majority representation of parties. While Dems will have a majority of seats in the House, that is irrelevant- Reps are the majority party in the majority of States.

That's the Trump Team objective. Whether it succeeds or not remains to be seen.

It is basically impossible to happen.

1) When certified the electors are assigned by the campaigns. It would mean people from Biden campaign to vote Trump
2) There is faithless elector laws in several states (along with a likely scenario that the courts could enforce it for electors from other states)
3) If all that fails because the dems control the house they can stop the electoral vote until time runs out and it goes to President Nancy by default.

All this talk is stressing people out and there is no need.

BonnieSituation

Foxtrol wrote: »

It is basically impossible to happen.

1) When certified the electors are assigned by the campaigns. It would mean people from Biden campaign to vote Trump
2) There is faithless elector laws in several states (along with a likely scenario that the courts could enforce it for electors from other states)
3) If all that fails because the dems control the house they can stop the electoral vote until time runs out and it goes to President Nancy by default.

All this talk is stressing people out and there is no need.

I think the issue is that people are generally unsure even who or how the electors are selected. You made good points here, especially no. 3. Didn't think of that aspect.

Timberrrrrrrr

Foxtrol wrote: »

It is basically impossible to happen.

1) When certified the electors are assigned by the campaigns. It would mean people from Biden campaign to vote Trump
2) There is faithless elector laws in several states (along with a likely scenario that the courts could enforce it for electors from other states)
3) If all that fails because the dems control the house they can stop the electoral vote until time runs out and it goes to President Nancy by default.

All this talk is stressing people out and there is no need.

I think it's the fact that he is trying every single trick in the book (and a few unwritten ones too) to hold onto power no matter what that has people so shocked. Honestly, you have to ask yourself this...How far is he willing to go?

Itssoeasy

BonnieSituation wrote: »

So they're going after faithless electors because they want to overturn the result?

I thought they were winning Georgia, Arizona and Wisconsin.

It's hard to keep up.

The increasing desperation sounds like the last days in the bunker.

Well they seem to have realised they can’t overturn the actual results so they are trying to stop states certifying results.

josip

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I think it's the fact that he is trying every single trick in the book (and a few unwritten ones too) to hold onto power no matter what that has people so shocked. Honestly, you have to ask yourself this...How far is he willing to go?

Reminiscent of the Tories being prepared to prorogue parliament to try to get the type of Brexit they wanted last summer.
In the end, that all worked out rather well for Cummings and his ilk.

TomOnBoard

Foxtrol wrote: »

It is basically impossible to happen.

1) When certified the electors are assigned by the campaigns. It would mean people from Biden campaign to vote Trump
2) There is faithless elector laws in several states (along with a likely scenario that the courts could enforce it for electors from other states)
3) If all that fails because the dems control the house they can stop the electoral vote until time runs out and it goes to President Nancy by default.

All this talk is stressing people out and there is no need.

Using your scenarios:

1. Plan B works when a State does not certify the result based on the People's vote. This could happen where a Secretary of State refuses to certify, or where a State legislature steps in and takes control.
2) In States that have faithless elector laws, some can recall electors while others only punish them by a fine after the event. In States with no such laws, faithless electors may vote faithlessly if they wish.
3) Dems may be able to stymie a Contingent Election for President. However, in such a situation, the Senate has the power to elect a Vice President. That person could then present for inaugeration as POTUS in opposition to House Speaker.

Would any of these scenarios succeed? I dunno! However, none of us here can categorically say that anything is 'impossible' right now. Even the most highly educated and experienced Constitutional lawyers and academics believe that Electoral College and Contingent Election laws are full of holes and traps. We are in uncharted waters, and there are rocks all over the place. Now is not the time for sailing merrily along!

Foxtrol

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I think it's the fact that he is trying every single trick in the book (and a few unwritten ones too) to hold onto power no matter what that has people so shocked. Honestly, you have to ask yourself this...How far is he willing to go?

Maybe there is a trick he can find but so far what many people are running around with their hair on fire about simply isn't possible due to specific rules that must be followed, not just customs that he has proved he can trample over.

Add to that how the tricks from his book have failed time and again during his term that it isn't like he has a concerning success rate.

The only real threat I can find at this point is if they find some court to throw out all mail ballots, like they are trying in PA. It is a borderline frivolous case but if that was successful the whole system could burn down, though I still don't think it makes it past even a packed Supreme Court.

Foxtrol

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Using your scenarios:

1. Plan B works when a State does not certify the result based on the People's vote. This could happen where a Secretary of State refuses to certify, or where a State legislature steps in and takes control.

Even if you have SoS that corrupt (which they haven't appeared at all to be so far), there are avenues to go to court to force certification.

2) In States that have faithless elector laws, some can recall electors while others only punish them by a fine after the event. In States with no such laws, faithless electors may vote faithlessly if they wish.

For this you'd then need state legislators to be corrupt enough to send GOP electors and at that point then this is likely a moot point, as they wouldn't be 'faithless' anymore.

3) Dems may be able to stymie a Contingent Election for President. However, in such a situation, the Senate has the power to elect a Vice President. That person could then present for inaugeration as POTUS in opposition to House Speaker.

Looks like you're getting two mixed up. I'm not talking about a contingent election, I'm talking about the counting of electoral votes, which would have to happen prior to a contingent election. You can't get to a contingent election without a dem house allowing for it.

Even if some dems lost their minds and flipped then you'd need nearly all GOP to go along with the power grab in the senate.

Would any of these scenarios succeed? I dunno! However, none of us here can categorically say that anything is 'impossible' right now. Even the most highly educated and experienced Constitutional lawyers and academics believe that Electoral College and Contingent Election laws are full of holes and traps. We are in uncharted waters, and there are rocks all over the place. Now is not the time for sailing merrily along!

It sounds the exact same as the talk we had in 2016. Yes, there were all these crazy routes that could have been used to stop Trump post election but nothing panned out. There is a tiny chance but no where near the level people appear to be worrying about.

eire4

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Well America won’t be able to lecture other countries(even when what they’re saying is true) now, because those countries can just point on how much of a mess the American election was. That trump guy that’s now in the pentagon seems like a piece of work. Is he there past the inauguration or is he there to cause a mess for 70 days ?

I would say its all part of the burn the house down on the way out the door I expect to see from the president. Never mind I can only imagine the amount of shredding of documents, deleting e-mails etc that is going on.

Itssoeasy

eire4 wrote: »

I would say its all part of the burn the house down on the way out the door I expect to see from the president. Never mind I can only imagine the amount of shredding of documents, deleting e-mails etc that is going on.

Yeah the shredding in the next 70 days will make the Iran contra shredding look normal.

Edit: Obama has a book coming out and it’s fairly frank from passages CNN have quoted. It seems the Obama and Mitch McConnell dislike was a two way street.