• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged 2024 Election Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Brainster said:
I despise the man and will vote for whomever the Democrats nominate (even Hillary). Simple as that. However I have respect for the process, and if Trump wins fair and square, he should and will become President again (this whole bit about him being foiled by the certification is just a bit of mental masturbation on the part of a writer).

If we can't beat him at the ballot box, let's try using lawyers and protest the certification and basically try another January 6? Yeah, that's going to work out as well as the last time. The old saw about being careful whom you make your enemy couldn't be more apt.
Click to expand...

Reasonable minds can disagree about whether or not Trump should be removed from the ballot under the 14th amendment. Calling that an attempt to “steal the election away from Trump” is cultist talk.

What happened on January 6th was an illegal and violent coup. The actions being taken to potentially remove Trump from the ballot are nothing of the kind.

No matter how much certain conservatives claim they despise Trump and do not support him, they can’t seem to stop themselves from making false equivalencies that serve to downplay the severity of his actions.
 
I'm not sure how much sway Michael Moore has these days, but the unions involved seem to indicate a chunk of people. He's just sent this out:

Stunned by his refusal to stop funding Netanyahu’s slaughter in Gaza with our tax dollars — an action that may return Trump to the Oval Office — thousands in Michigan who are demanding an immediate ceasefire, including the statewide teachers union, the United Auto Workers, the National Nurses Union and the union of flight attendants(!) plus many others on Tuesday will vote “Uncommitted” to help save Biden from himself… and save the rest of us from a 2nd Term Trump. As Michelle Goldberg wrote in the Times on Friday, "Biden is in danger of losing Michigan and, with it, the whole election."
Click to expand...
 
johnny karate said:
Reasonable minds can disagree about whether or not Trump should be removed from the ballot under the 14th amendment. Calling that an attempt to “steal the election away from Trump” is cultist talk.
Click to expand...

If Trump wins the election on November 5, then any attempt to deny him the presidency is absolutely an attempt to steal the election, just as Trump's actions after the 2020 vote were an attempt to steal the election. You guys seem to have decided that Trump's real mistake was that he didn't succeed.
 
Brainster said:
If Trump wins the election on November 5, then any attempt to deny him the presidency is absolutely an attempt to steal the election, just as Trump's actions after the 2020 vote were an attempt to steal the election. You guys seem to have decided that Trump's real mistake was that he didn't succeed.
Click to expand...

Is it only the 14th Amendment that you find unenforceable, or are there other parts of the Constitution that you want to discard without repealing?
 
Brainster said:
If Trump wins the election on November 5, then any attempt to deny him the presidency is absolutely an attempt to steal the election, just as Trump's actions after the 2020 vote were an attempt to steal the election. You guys seem to have decided that Trump's real mistake was that he didn't succeed.
Click to expand...

It seems absolutely clear that it is actually Trump's role in events of January 6th. And the 14 amendment might be very relevant to that. People might differ in opinions if January 6th counts as insurrection or not. If Trump role was strong enough or not.
How can you ignore all that after pages and pages of it being repeated again and again ?
 
Another example of how the MAGAts are better organised and presenting an even greater threat to democracy in 2024:
The Guardian: A new tool targets voter fraud in Georgia – but is it skirting the law?

A rightwing group has developed an AI tool that cross-references voter databases with other info, public and commercially obtained, and if there's the slightest discrepancy, it will transmit the info to a "volunteer" in the relevant county for filing with the local elections board. Many of those volunteers are members of Election Integrity Network, a rightwing group run by Cleta Mitchell, who was one of trump's attourneys when he made the infamous call in 2020 to Brad Raffensperger, imploring him to find the extra votes needed for trump to win Georgia.
 
Brainster said:
If Trump wins the election on November 5, then any attempt to deny him the presidency is absolutely an attempt to steal the election, just as Trump's actions after the 2020 vote were an attempt to steal the election. You guys seem to have decided that Trump's real mistake was that he didn't succeed.
Click to expand...

If he really tried to steal the election in 2020, then he's ineligible to be POTUS. That's not a reverse-uno thing. He's now ineligible.

Bizarrely, I think the SCOTUS *might* rule that States can decide he's ineligible something like 6-3 with the *left* wing judges voting in dissent. Its always been a right-wing/conservative viewpoint that the States have rights, and the States set election rules.

Another thing that just might happen, is Congress votes that he's ineligible before inauguration day. I think the Dems take the House, but the GOP keeps the Senate. But, I think there are a handful of GOP Senators that will be glad TO FINALLY MOVE PAST THIS ************! Thats assuming he chooses a halfway decent running mate and not, for example, Ramaswamy.
 
lobosrul5 said:
Bizarrely, I think the SCOTUS *might* rule that States can decide he's ineligible something like 6-3 with the *left* wing judges voting in dissent. Its always been a right-wing/conservative viewpoint that the States have rights, and the States set election rules.
Click to expand...

If that was a principled stance, I might hold out more hope. It's rarely been a principled stance, though, at last check. Rather, it's normally been a matter the boils down to grasping at any straws they can to defend rich and/or powerful people exploiting everyone else and gets discarded easily when it's not useful. It's followed a similar pattern in general, though, because, quite frankly, very few people truly care about or are actually motivated by some principled stance on state's rights. Recent examples that keep that pretty clear include all that state's rights blabbering on abortion access that has already morphed into many of those same people openly pushing national bans on abortion access. Sometimes in the very next sentence they voice after they talked about state's rights.
 
Brainster said:
If Trump wins the election on November 5, then any attempt to deny him the presidency is absolutely an attempt to steal the election, just as Trump's actions after the 2020 vote were an attempt to steal the election. You guys seem to have decided that Trump's real mistake was that he didn't succeed.
Click to expand...

Yes, using legitimate legal procedures to enforce a constitutional provision that prevents insurrectionists from holding office to keep an insurrectionist off the ballot is exactly the same thing as the insurrection he fomented.

Well argued, person who is not all bothsides-ing as a deflection from acknowledging it’s their side and their side alone who are the violent fascists.
 
johnny karate said:
Yes, using legitimate legal procedures to enforce a constitutional provision that prevents insurrectionists from holding office to keep an insurrectionist off the ballot is exactly the same thing as the insurrection he fomented.

Well argued, person who is not all bothsides-ing as a deflection from acknowledging it’s their side and their side alone who are the violent fascists.
Click to expand...

Right wingers often don't understand the difference between using the law and abusing the law.
 
Brainster said:
I despise the man and will vote for whomever the Democrats nominate (even Hillary). Simple as that. However I have respect for the process, and if Trump wins fair and square, he should and will become President again (this whole bit about him being foiled by the certification is just a bit of mental masturbation on the part of a writer).

If we can't beat him at the ballot box, let's try using lawyers and protest the certification and basically try another January 6? Yeah, that's going to work out as well as the last time. The old saw about being careful whom you make your enemy couldn't be more apt.
Click to expand...
:dl:

Ship already sailed. He broke the election law by his involvement in the insurrection regardless of how his stacked SC votes.
 
Last edited:
right, barring an insurrectionist from running for office is insurrection

back in the day they would have chopped him into pieces and thrown him in a river. maga
 
Aridas said:
If that was a principled stance, I might hold out more hope. It's rarely been a principled stance, though, at last check. Rather, it's normally been a matter the boils down to grasping at any straws they can to defend rich and/or powerful people exploiting everyone else and gets discarded easily when it's not useful. It's followed a similar pattern in general, though, because, quite frankly, very few people truly care about or are actually motivated by some principled stance on state's rights. Recent examples that keep that pretty clear include all that state's rights blabbering on abortion access that has already morphed into many of those same people openly pushing national bans on abortion access. Sometimes in the very next sentence they voice after they talked about state's rights.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I certainly think its less likely than not. OTOH I do believe that most of the right wing SCOTUS members actually personally want Trump gone.

I just look forward to all the MAGA guys going BUT THATS NOT DEMOCRTATIC, when States can rule that indeed yes he's an insurrectionist and therefore not allowed on the ballot. When for years and years I've heard the excuse when discussing the EC, each state getting 2 senators etc: BUT WE'RE A REPUBLIC NOT A DEMOCRACY*. Of course Trump we're talking about Trump people who largely don't understand the concept of hypocrisy.

*which is among the dumber things ever uttered from a human beings mouth
 
Dr.Sid said:
It seems absolutely clear that it is actually Trump's role in events of January 6th. And the 14 amendment might be very relevant to that.
Click to expand...

Might? Don't go too far out on a limb there.

People might differ in opinions if January 6th counts as insurrection or not. If Trump role was strong enough or not.
How can you ignore all that after pages and pages of it being repeated again and again ?
Click to expand...

Because you guys keep ignoring that the Supreme Court will rule on this issue and it is their interpretation of the 14th Amendment that matters and not yours and not some Democratic Secretary of State.
 
Brainster said:
Because you guys keep ignoring that the Supreme Court will rule on this issue and it is their interpretation of the 14th Amendment that matters and not yours and not some Democratic Secretary of State.
Click to expand...

no one is ignoring that. there's been lots of discussion on that, especially in the other really long thread specifically about the 14th
 
Tim Scott is a polyp in Trump's arse. Polyps have a tendency to become cancerous and are routinely removed during colonoscopies. In this case, it should be left to fulfill its evolution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom