Trump vs Biden 2020, Day 64 of the Pennsylvania count (pt 5) Read OP

WrenBoy

WrenBoy wrote: »

Forget Trump, its the voters you need to reassure, the people who vote, all of them need to know that elections are fair and above board. Even the ones who don't agree with you.

In fairness, he's responsible for the creation of any uncertainty amongst voters. As a result of baseless claims.

jmayo

briany wrote: »

He's in illustrious company in terms of celebrities who rabidly support Trump. Kirstie Alley and Randy Quaid are also fully paid-up MAGA-hat-wearing conspiracy nuts.

Oh, Gary Busey's a fan as well.

Don't forget that good old boy from Texas McConaughey who is also Trump fan.

Randle P. McMurphy wrote: »

He could be getting ready for his Reichstag moment. By enabling him the Republicans are in danger of sleepwalking themselves in to the same mess the Germans got in to. Some may say I'm being over dramatic, but any student of history can see the parallels with his political career to date and a certain politician in 1930's Germany.

Not any way comparable.

rossie1977 wrote: »

He has ramped up nationalism to a dangerous level.
Shown distain for human rights especially asylum seekers
Created a ton of enemies which to blame societies ills on.
Increased the us militaries power
Has tried to control the media
Obsessed with national security

Ehh except when it comes to Russia.
Who as a matter of fact has been an enemy and competing world power of the US for the last 70 odd years.

rossie1977 wrote: »

When people think of fascism they think of Hitler or Mussolini but fascists in 2020 have a different coat of paint. Russia, Israel, Hungary, Poland are all fascist states right now.

That is stretching the term fascism and of course it was has happened over the last decade or so.

Fuzzyduzzy wrote: »

The warhogs in the establishment (democrats /republicans) must be thrilled about this band getting back together. I'm not talking about one party here, I'm on about the US invading other countries under the guise of being the police force of the world and profiting from it.

Undeniably Trump has his flaws but a lot of people who hate him so much and voted against him rather than voting FOR Harris/Biden may look back fondly at 4 years without thousands of US troops losing their lives at the expense of millions of civilians in the Middle East or elsewhere.

So only Democrats started wars and start the US interfering in foreign countries.
Jaysus never realised that. :rolleyes:

Would you rather the US of Trump where he is your ally one day and the next he runs away and drops you in the shyte?
Or where he dumps you in the shyte because his new buddy Putin tells him to ?

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

weirdly the guy himself doesn't even claim to be an MIT Professor. DrunkMonkey just made that up.

Trump supporter making things up ?
Check.

Boggles

jmayo wrote: »

Don't forget that good old boy from Texas McConaughey who is also Trump fan.

No one knows what party he supports, it's assumed Republican because he is from Texas, but he has never openly give his outright support for Trump or Biden.

hometruths

wes wrote: »

It has been long established that Trump is racist. There is literally years of evidences of the mans racism, and we are talking about stuff from long before his Presidency. Here is just one example:

Trump Will Not Apologize for Calling for Death Penalty Over Central Park Five


Its amazing the people will claim Trump is not a racist with a straight face.

How is that evidence of racism? Genuine question, I don't see the racism, can you clarify?

hynesie08

schmittel wrote: »

How is that evidence of racism? Genuine question, I don't see the racism, can you clarify?

Ho many white men accused of assault did he take out a full page ad in the new york times calling for their death??

jmayo

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Can you point us to the policies Trump ran on?

Or the Republican party platform?

No, you can't because they are just a party of power for old white men.

This is the problem with a lot of what is viewed as the left these days and a fair few who are now driving a wing of the Democrats these days.

Do you view Republicans or a lot of others of the opposing viewpoint as just old white guys.

If it was just old white guys then Trump would get nowhere near the white house.
Just look at his Latino vote or fact that women vote for him.
And in Red states all age groups vote for him.

Yes the ones pulling the strings in the background of the Republican party are definitely old rich white guys, but if you look closely you will find a similar group behind the Democrats.

BTW Biden is an old relatively rich white guy.

Most Western countries and the US included won't survive without those old white guys, even if you despise them.

Let some of the young and indeed loons on the modern left in charge and you end up with the place tearing itself apart.
And that is exactly why Jeremy Corbyn was unelectable even when up against an eejit like Johnson.

Not that America isn't tearing itself apart with the loons on the right.

The sooner we get back to the centre the better.

bocaman wrote: »

This refusal to accept a Biden victory is all about keeping the attorneys from the door. As soon as Donald Trump becomes a private citizen people will be knocking on his door. 4 more years in the White House and like any good thief he's home free. The principal of democracy and the democratic will of the people is only secondary.

Not just himself, but the kids are in the firing line as well.

Non solum non ambulabit wrote: »

Australia, Japan and South Korea would be more left wing than the Democrats. Significantly so.

Left wing in the US means taxing rich and nationalised healthcare.

Left in US used to be that.
Although their left has always been right to most of the rest of the world.

Around the world the left used to be about a fair deal for workers, a fair deal for the ones at the bottom, equality for the sexes, but the term has been hijacked by all sorts more intent on fighting battles over identities, unfethered immigration, and imaginary inequalities than whether people have a decent wage, with access to decent healthcare and decent education.

hometruths

hynesie08 wrote: »

Ho many white men accused of assault did he take out a full page ad in the new york times calling for their death??

The fact that he did not take out other ads against white suspects is hardly evidence that he is calling for the death penalty because of their skin colour rather than because of their alleged crimes.

Billy Mays

schmittel wrote: »

The fact that he did not take out other ads against white suspects is hardly evidence that he is calling for the death penalty because of their skin colour rather than because of their alleged crimes.

Is telling black or brown politicians who were born in America to go back to where they came from racist enough for you?

Zubeneschamali

jmayo wrote: »

This is the problem with a lot of what is viewed as the left these days and a fair few who are now driving a wing of the Democrats these days.

If I'm wrong, you can surely point to the policy documents.

But there aren't any, its just an identity movement, and the identity is very pale.

57% of white voters voted Trump, this time, vs only 54% in 2016.

joe40

Polar101 wrote: »

This talk of civil war or a military coup makes no sense and greatly overexaggerates the importance of Donald Trump. He's just a guy who lost an election and is upset about it. 250 million Americans didn't vote for him. A lot of Americans have owned guns before, but they haven't had civil wars in over 150 years. Going to need a bit more to start a new one, than some nonsensical accusations about election fraud.

I don't think there will be an actual civil war but all Trump's rhetoric about a stolen election and fraud on an epic scale could inspire some gun nut to go on a mass shooting spree.
Trump's nonsense is entertaining to a point, but then you realise a Timothy Mcveigh type could cause terrible damage as a result of Trump refusing to accept the result.

hynesie08

schmittel wrote: »

The fact that he did not take out other ads against white suspects is hardly evidence that he is calling for the death penalty because of their skin colour rather than because of their alleged crimes.

There was also the civil suit from the 70s that he's never denied.....


https://www.npr.org/2016/09/29/495955920/donald-trump-plagued-by-decades-old-housing-discrimination-case?t=1605184647852

hometruths

Billy Mays wrote: »

Is telling black or brown politicians who were born in America to go back to where they came from racist enough for you?

That is pretty racist, I can see that. My problem was I could not see the evidence for racism in the NYT article linked, hence my question.

Leroy42

WrenBoy wrote: »

I don't care what he says, its about making the effort to assuage the fears of voters who believe a democratic election has been corrupted to some degree or other. By telling them to shut up and that they are stupid/racist/etc (not you specifically) you only drive further division increasing their distrust and even legitimising it to a degree. With a transparent investigation you at least will show you care about voters concerns and about maintaining fairness, most of them may then believe elections can be trusted. I believe its an important thing to do, others disagree thats on them.

Of course there should be an investigation if there is enough evidence that it warrants it. But Trump being angry at the result, or that joe overheard a guy in a shop say something about another person that saw a friend on facebook etc is not grounds.

They have plenty of systems in place to ensure the security of the process. They undertake checks during the count, their our observers to watch over them, the computer systems are verified, sample ballot are reviewed etc.

You seem to think that nothing at all is in place and that an investigation is needed as there is no evidence that it works. But the vast majority of evidence says it works. There has been no evidence of who carried out the fraud, under what conditions, who was involved, who paid for it. Nothing.

The weight of evidence lies with those seeking to claim something is amiss.

Trump basically wants to start a fishing expedition in the hope that something, anything might turn up and they can work from there.

Trump openly stated that he wouldn't accept the results if he lost, yet his 72m+ voters didn't care. What makes you think that any reporting or court case will assuage them from the notion that the election was fair?

Do they have to lose every case? Or just most of them? Does every state get recounted r just some of them? Do senate and house votes get recounted or just some of them?

The problem really lies with the fact that Trump isn't actually claiming voter fraud. He is claiming voter fraud only in those states that he thinks he could possibly win. And no one has been able to answer why, if the Dems and the media have undertaken such a fraud, why they wouldn't also include Senate and House races? Or why not stick closer to the polls?

Quin_Dub

I remain unconvinced that Trump is a racist in the typical definition of the term.

He is absolutely not a "White Supremacist" - They are people that talk about "White Genocide" and "Blood purity" and other similar rhetoric , that is not Trump.

Trump doesn't like nor understand people that are "different" to him , simple as that. It's not "racism" , it's ignorance and narcissism.

Rich, Successful, High Profile Black/Latino/LGBTQ person? No problem , he can identify with them.

He doesn't know or understand them and can't be arsed to try to, so he just doesn't like them as a result.

Driven by his ignorance and narcissism he also resorts to base generalisations and tired old tropes - "Blacks are lazy" , "Jews are good with Money" etc. etc.

The other issue with Trump is that as long as you "like him" , he likes you and he cannot tell a "fan" that they are wrong or that their opinions are vile etc.

Hence you get the "Well I hear that they like me, which I like" response when asked about QAnon and so on.

Racism is an ideology - Trump doesn't have those , he only thinks about his immediate personal gratification.

Bottom line , he's lazy and ignorant and just couldn't care less about people that aren't like himself or that don't tell him he's awesome.

Stephen Miller is absolutely categorically a racist White Supremacist and because he blows smoke up Trump and all Trump cares about are the "likes" , Miller gets to do the awful stuff he does.

schmittel

schmittel wrote: »

That is pretty racist, I can see that. My problem was I could not see the evidence for racism in the NYT article linked, hence my question.

It is certainly a weaker and more speculative example of his racism compared to e.g. this or this and I understand why you could argue that his actions in that instance could be considered something other than racist.

Leroy42

Well you could argue that many people that hold racist views aren't really racist based on that. They just don't like or understand vast groups of people based on preconceived ideas! And I guess to a certain extent that is fine for the average person. We all have biases, which are derived from experiences whether personal or anecdotal. The issue is that Trump is the POTUS. He needs to be at the forefront of the conversation and how this is developed. When he continually comes out with racist remarks, when he continually sides with 'his' side then ignorance can no longer be an excuse.

I would agree in part that he isn't the traditional racist, that all coloured people are inherently less value than whites for example. It is just that it seems that he sees less value in them as a whole, white people seem to offer more examples of the type of people he can understand.

weisses

Deleted User wrote: »

In fairness, he's responsible for the creation of any uncertainty amongst voters. As a result of baseless claims.

Just look at the idiots below in 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pSmwq_13uE

hometruths

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I remain unconvinced that Trump is a racist in the typical definition of the term.

He is absolutely not a "White Supremacist" - They are people that talk about "White Genocide" and "Blood purity" and other similar rhetoric , that is not Trump.

Trump doesn't like nor understand people that are "different" to him , simple as that. It's not "racism" , it's ignorance and narcissism.

Rich, Successful, High Profile Black/Latino/LGBTQ person? No problem , he can identify with them.

He doesn't know or understand them and can't be arsed to try to, so he just doesn't like them as a result.

Driven by his ignorance and narcissism he also resorts to base generalisations and tired old tropes - "Blacks are lazy" , "Jews are good with Money" etc. etc.

The other issue with Trump is that as long as you "like him" , he likes you and he cannot tell a "fan" that they are wrong or that their opinions are vile etc.

Hence you get the "Well I hear that they like me, which I like" response when asked about QAnon and so on.

Racism is an ideology - Trump doesn't have those , he only thinks about his immediate personal gratification.

Bottom line , he's lazy and ignorant and just couldn't care less about people that aren't like himself or that don't tell him he's awesome.

Stephen Miller is absolutely categorically a racist White Supremacist and because he blows smoke up Trump and all Trump cares about are the "likes" , Miller gets to do the awful stuff he does.

Excellent post. 100% agree.

hometruths

Deleted User wrote: »

It is certainly a weaker and more speculative example of his racism compared to e.g. this or this and I understand why you could argue that his actions in that instance could be considered something other than racist.

What book is the black guys counting my money from? Re the discrimination suit, I am not convinced it is evidence of inherent racism, but undoubtedly it is a stronger argument for it than the Central Park Five ad.

The reason I queried the ad is it is a good example of how Trump generates much hysteria which does not actually stand up to scrutiny. "He's a racist, look what he said about the Central Park 5 or look what he said about the Charlotteville riots etc" or he supports white supremacists etc.

Meanwhile comments like go back to where you came from sort of get forgotten about in the melee.

I think there would be a much stronger argument for him being racist if so much of it was not blown out of context and used as a stick to beat him with.

But ultimately I don't actually believe he is inherently racist. I think Quin Dub hit the nail on the head with his analysis. If you praise Trump, he likes you irrespective of race, colour or creed. If you don't like him, he will hate you irrespective of race, colour or creed.

He's pretty non discriminatory that way!

hometruths

Leroy42 wrote: »

Well you could argue that many people that hold racist views aren't really racist based on that. They just don't like or understand vast groups of people based on preconceived ideas! And I guess to a certain extent that is fine for the average person. We all have biases, which are derived from experiences whether personal or anecdotal. The issue is that Trump is the POTUS. He needs to be at the forefront of the conversation and how this is developed. When he continually comes out with racist remarks, when he continually sides with 'his' side then ignorance can no longer be an excuse.

I would agree in part that he isn't the traditional racist, that all coloured people are inherently less value than whites for example. It is just that it seems that he sees less value in them as a whole, white people seem to offer more examples of the type of people he can understand.

CNN pundit Van Jones made exactly this point very well on election night.

He commented that lots of people, Trump include, say look at my actions, what i've achieved, forget about all the bluster, actions speak louder than words.

Jones said that's a fair argument if you're Joe Ordinary, but like it or not, when you're POTUS words speak louder than your actions, which is precisely one of the reasons Obama retains so much respect.

eagle eye

Is Arizona done yet?

What about Nevada, North Carolina and Alaska? Is there a date they must be done by?

Non solum non ambulabit

jmayo wrote: »

Around the world the left used to be about a fair deal for workers, a fair deal for the ones at the bottom, equality for the sexes, but the term has been hijacked by all sorts more intent on fighting battles over identities, unfethered immigration, and imaginary inequalities than whether people have a decent wage, with access to decent healthcare and decent education.

Exactly. The left has been taken over by social liberals. There is no traditional left and right anymore both sides have been co-opted.

I don't know how it gets back to the way it was. The left needs to drop woke culture and the right drop religious and racist culture.

8-10

weisses wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pSmwq_13uE

This is very good, clear hypocrisy, shows his previous form and the numbers clearly don't lie.

I don't buy anyone defending him at this stage.

Christy42

Non solum non ambulabit wrote: »

Exactly. The left has been taken over by social liberals. There is no traditional left and right anymore both sides have been co-opted.

I don't know how it gets back to the way it was. The left needs to drop woke culture and the right drop religious and racist culture.

A lot of the "wokeness" is just trying to get the right to drop racist culture. As for calling cards being identity. I don't see it. Their main points at the moment, better policing models with police not being called out to do the job social services, higher minimum wage, healthcare for all and better education services for the poor. That is what AOC pushes for, that is what Bernie has been pushing for. That is what the major elected left wing voices have been pushing.

I will admit that defund the police is a bloody stupid slogan that says something different to what was argued for. That is not helping their PR.

Who brought race into the squad's identity. Trump did. You had the elected numpty on CNN saying Muslims shouldn't be part of government because they can't swear on a bible. History should "patriotic" history according to Trump. Qanon cultists with their racist conspiracies now being elected to government. These are just the elected officials and like it or not Trump is the current head of the right in the US with no major Conservative voice challenging him.

Boggles

schmittel wrote: »

What book is the black guys counting my money from? Re the discrimination suit, I am not convinced it is evidence of inherent racism, but undoubtedly it is a stronger argument for it than the Central Park Five ad.

The reason I queried the ad is it is a good example of how Trump generates much hysteria which does not actually stand up to scrutiny. "He's a racist, look what he said about the Central Park 5 or look what he said about the Charlotteville riots etc" or he supports white supremacists etc.

Meanwhile comments like go back to where you came from sort of get forgotten about in the melee.

I think there would be a much stronger argument for him being racist if so much of it was not blown out of context and used as a stick to beat him with.

But ultimately I don't actually believe he is inherently racist. I think Quin Dub hit the nail on the head with his analysis. If you praise Trump, he likes you irrespective of race, colour or creed. If you don't like him, he will hate you irrespective of race, colour or creed.

He's pretty non discriminatory that way!

Nope, you do and say racist shít. You are at least someway racist. Full stop. It isn't the early 90s anymore, we don't give people especially people with great power free passes for just being "harmlessly casually racist".

Speaking of which.

I've got black accountants at Trump Castle and at Trump Plaza. Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys wearing yarmulkes.... Those are the only kind of people I want counting my money. Nobody else... Besides that, I've got to tell you something else. I think that the guy's lazy. And it's probably not his fault because laziness is a trait in blacks

hometruths

Boggles wrote: »

Nope, you do and say racist shít. You are at least someway racist. Full stop. It isn't the early 90s anymore, we don't give people especially people with great power free passes for just being "harmlessly casually racist".

Speaking of which.

Aristotle already highlighted that quote, attributed to Trump.

In a US context, if we are not giving anybody free passes on historic racism any more then really any white politician over a certain age is unfit for office. We might as well accept that until the millenials clock up the necessary miles, only ethnic minorities should be able to run for office, because they are only demographic not guilty of some sort of historic racism.

Case in point - Joe Biden, President elect:

https://twitter.com/alexkotch/status/1144741467803586561

Boggles

schmittel wrote: »

Aristotle already highlighted that quote, attributed to Trump.

In a US context, if we are not giving anybody free passes on historic racism any more then really any white politician over a certain age is unfit for office. We might as well accept that until the millenials clock up the necessary miles, only ethnic minorities should be able to run for office, because they are only demographic not guilty of some sort of historic racism.

Case in point - Joe Biden, President elect:

https://twitter.com/alexkotch/status/1144741467803586561

Sorry when I said it was definitely not the 90s anymore, by extension I also meant it wasn't the 70s either.

And there is only one person on here I can see given "free passes" for current racism.

storker

Non solum non ambulabit wrote: »

Exactly. The left has been taken over by social liberals. There is no traditional left and right anymore both sides have been co-opted.

I don't know how it gets back to the way it was. The left needs to drop woke culture and the right drop religious and racist culture.

As Bob Geldof said to those Trinity students, "There are people out there who haven't had a pay rise in ten years and you guys are in here banging on about transgender toilets."

Professor Moriarty

Strangely, of all people, Enoch Powell captured it best:

“It depends on how you define the word "racialist." If you mean being conscious of the differences between men and nations, and from that, races, then we are all racialists. However, if you mean a man who despises a human being because he belongs to another race, or a man who believes that one race is inherently superior to another, then the answer is emphatically "No".”

hometruths

Boggles wrote: »

Sorry when I said it was definitely not the 90s anymore, by extension I also meant it wasn't the 70s either.

And there is only one person on here I can see given "free passes" for current racism.

That's exactly what I mean, it doesn't matter if the racism took place in the 90s or the 70's or whenever or by whomever. it is discrimination full stop.