Merged 2024 Election Thread

[autumn1971]

If Trump wins fair and square that is that, no need for violence.

Republicans never do anything “fair and square,” they had to collude with an antagonistic foreign power to get the traitor to the White House, they will always be treasonous pieces of ****.

 

[ahhell]

So you think Trump should be immune from the 14th Amendment ban on insurrectionists holding office, should not be charged for conspiring to steal the 2020 election, should not be charged with stealing and mishandling classified govt documents, should not be charged with fraud regarding his Stormy Daniels payments?

Why do you think Trump is 100% above the law?

a. 14th amendment is debateable. There are reasons to believe what he did does qualify and reasons to believe it didn't.
b. He should be charged for something there, I'm not sure what but something there must have been illegal.
c. Stormy daniels, nope, that's total BS. NY took a misdemeanor with an expired statute of limitations and turned it into felony by combining it with a federal crime he hasn't been charged with.
d. Mishandling federal docs, probably not on account of nobody else in power ever gets charged with that but obstruction, definitely. I'm told the only reason they brought the mishandling charge was so he couldn't claim the obstruction charge bs because he wasn't being charged with some other crime.
e. I'll had, the other NY fraud case is pretty clear use of courts for political reasons. Run for office claiming you will prosecute Trump for something then prosecute him for a crime that almost nobody else has been prosecuted for. Its fraud where none of the supposed victims claim to have been victims.
f. The real problem is that he wasn't impeached on Jan 7th.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

State of the Union: Biden draws election battle lines in fiery speech

ChrisBFRPKY must be so disappointed.

Not at all. Biden said everything I wanted him to. I'm perfectly happy with the speech he gave.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

f. The real problem is that he wasn't impeached on Jan 7th.

As opposed to the 13th, when he actually was impeached for the second time.

The trial took a month, so I'm having a hard time understanding why the six-day delay was so significant, but I probably didn't understand points a through e either.

 

[theprestige]

I admit I am open to arguments that the American civil service is staffed by weak-minded jobsworths who will just do whatever they're told by whatever yes man is put in charge of their agency.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

The fact that Trump insisted on speaking privately with Putin without anyone else on the US side present should be evidence enough for everyone that he cannot be trusted to act in US interests primarily when dealing with Russia.
It is pure delusion to claim that he was tough on Russia in any way.

 

[ahhell]

As opposed to the 13th, when he actually was impeached for the second time.

The trial took a month, so I'm having a hard time understanding why the six-day delay was so significant, but I probably didn't understand points a through e either.

I doubt I could explain them to you but:

The stormy daniels charges and fraud charges related to Trumps over valuing properties are both a set of politically motived prosecutions. Trump is being prosecuted under legal theories and for crimes that nobody else has ever been prosecuted for.

Mishandling documents, its a crime but there are numerous examples of politicians doing the same thing who have not been prosecuted. The current president is one of them. What he did that was different is not cooperate in the investigation and lie about having the documents.

As to what he did on Jan 6. Depends on what you want to charge him with. What specific crime.

He should have been impeached on Jan 7th and convicted by the end of Jan 8th. But sure, I guess I used impeachment incorrectly and didn't get the timeline exactly right. I understand your confusion.

Anyrate, most of the legal cases against Trump are not slam dunk, sure the moral case is but what is legal and what is moral aren't always the same thing.

 

[dirtywick]

we should stipulate that some of the charges against trump aren’t slam dunks due to political reasons and not his innocence

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

Loyal to what degree? That they would stage a coup for him? No, I don't think he could. Furthermore, getting a general willing to do that isn't enough either. Generals don't lead operations from the front. You need lower ranking officers too, as well as the actual soldiers.

Beyond the fact that beginning with WWII it became SOP for army commanders to be at the front, it wouldn't take a large military force to stage a coup if the rest of the military refused to fire on their comrades (especially if the military leadership ordered them not to).

You seem to think that everyone who wants Trump to be president also wants him to become a dictator. And that's just ridiculous. It's not even remotely true. There are very few people who would actually be willing to stage a coup for him, and there's no way he can reliably identify them let alone get them all into the correct places in the military to pull it off. Hell, he's got enough problems even identifying the people in government who want to carry out his legal policy agendas, there's no way in hell he's ever pulling off a coup.

There are 10's of millions of people who are planning to vote for Trump even though he actually did try to stage a coup. So there is a sound basis for believing that large numbers of Trump supporters would welcome an Erdogan/Orban-style authoritative leader.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

I admit I am open to arguments that the American civil service is staffed by weak-minded jobsworths who will just do whatever they're told by whatever yes man is put in charge of their agency.

You should try to get a job sometime. You will find that in fact management does get to decide what the rank-and-file gets to work on and what they don't get to work on.

 

[Ziggurat]

Beyond the fact that beginning with WWII it became SOP for army commanders to be at the front

Generals do not lead from the front.

it wouldn't take a large military force to stage a coup if the rest of the military refused to fire on their comrades (especially if the military leadership ordered them not to).

And why would they do that, if they're not in agreement about a coup?

There are 10's of millions of people who are planning to vote for Trump even though he actually did try to stage a coup.

No, he didn't. He encouraged a protest which got out of hand, in part because Capitol police handled it badly. That wasn't a coup.

So there is a sound basis for believing that large numbers of Trump supporters would welcome an Erdogan/Orban-style authoritative leader.

There is no basis for believing that a large number of Trump supporters would back an actual coup.

 

[Ziggurat]

Why do you think Trump is 100% above the law?

First off, this is a straw man, this claim doesn't follow from anything I said. Secondly, your legal analysis is... suspect, to put it charitably.

 

[Hercules56]

Generals do not lead from the front.



And why would they do that, if they're not in agreement about a coup?



No, he didn't. He encouraged a protest which got out of hand, in part because Capitol police handled it badly. That wasn't a coup.



There is no basis for believing that a large number of Trump supporters would back an actual coup.

I follow a gun forum where members are calling for a coup to make sure Trump is our next President.

 

[Hercules56]

First off, this is a straw man, this claim doesn't follow from anything I said. Secondly, your legal analysis is... suspect, to put it charitably.

You don't seem to believe Trump should be held accountable for any of the many crimes that there is significant evidence fot. Insurrection, election fraud, tax fraud, stealing govt docs, you don't think Trump should be held accountable for any of it

 

[Ziggurat]

You should try to get a job sometime. You will find that in fact management does get to decide what the rank-and-file gets to work on and what they don't get to work on.

And if they tell you to commit a felony, you just do it, no questions asked.

Is that how you operate?

 

[Ziggurat]

You don't seem to believe Trump should be held accountable for any of the many crimes that there is significant evidence fot. Insurrection, election fraud, tax fraud, stealing govt docs, you don't think Trump should be held accountable for any of it

You're presuming that he's guilty of all of them. That remains to be demonstrated, doesn't it?

And BTW, if Trump is guilty of insurrection, why wasn't he criminally charged with anything for that? Are you really claiming that the 14th amendment is the only remedy to handle insurrection?

 

[Aridas]

Because it was.

Tell me you didn't pay attention without telling me you didn't pay attention.

Mmm. That is what you just did with this, after all. Hardly a surprise, of course, given your record.

And also absolutely overblown to the point of tinfoil hat conspiracies.

Some, sure. There's a real gap between what Trump wants and what he can actually accomplish, after all.

This is the thing, if you rate Trumps actions on a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 is a thing any president would do and 10 off the cliff into NAZI's. Trumps spends his time between 5 and 7 but his opponents act like its all 11.

All 11? Not in my experience, honestly, unless you're picking at outliers. Stuff like Trump getting 2 scoops of ice cream and everyone else getting one and the covfefe tweet that was purposefully made into a bigger thing by the Trump Administration were very petty and undignified, but pointedly minor.

Stuff like "Russia, if you're listening..." and all the rest of Trump's actions to get Russia to do that, casually giving Putin blackmail on himself during his campaign, his long history of trying to get in on Russia's corrupt business scene and pandering to Russia's leaders, immediately trying to end sanctions on Russia unilaterally, unlawfully delaying further Russian sanctions (at least until they could be used to offset the image of Trump being walked all over by Putin), casually giving away top secret information to the Russian ambassador as if it were small talk, regurgitating Russian propaganda seemingly out of nowhere, his secret calls and meetings with Putin that he went to extraordinary lengths to hide even from his own Administration... There's lots, lots more, but I'll stop there. All 11? No. Nazi? No. Is all that and more very much worthy of being a basis for concern, unlike tin foil hat CTs? Absolutely.

Even when it comes to the concerns expressed about Trump attempting to pull off a military coup expressed here, though... the words "It Can't Happen Here!" come immediately to mind. Would he be able to do it? For all the back and forth, we really don't know. Would he try? It's uncomfortably likely. His previous Administration was already far too notorious for engaging in government purges and favoring loyalists over competence, as it was, and it's been made it rather clear that the intent is to ramp those efforts up, if given the opportunity. He may be incompetent and there's a good chance that he would fail again if he attempted such, but the damage likely to be done in the process is not some joke.

Have you ever seen US media? We are at zero risk of it becoming dominated by Trump allies.

Just like the radio is at no risk of being dominated by Trump allies? Either way, Republican policy decisions have greatly enabled the consolidation of media outlets into the hands of fewer and fewer owners.

Why do you think so many working class people support Trump?

Because the overall media biases in the US quite favor Republicans, to say the least. There's more, of course, and it's certainly true that Democrats are not even remotely perfect, but different standards and tactics are being applied, to a large extent.

Because they see exactly this sort of thing happening under the Democrats. And the push to keep Trump off the ballot fits that pattern exactly. Not letting your opponents even run is exactly the sort of anti-democratic move that you say you're worried about. Flooding your political opponent with so many prosecutions and lawsuits that something might stick is exactly the sort of soft fascism you think is a threat. Why are you worried about Trump maybe doing this in the future when it's already happening?

Mmm. There's a qualitative difference here that you seem to be intent on ignoring.

 

[d4m10n]

You're presuming that he's guilty of all of them. That remains to be demonstrated, doesn't it?

I'd say we have all the evidence we need to evaluate whether he has given aid or comfort to the enemies of the United States.

 

[Ziggurat]

Even when it comes to the concerns expressed about Trump attempting to pull off a military coup expressed here, though... the words "It Can't Happen Here!" come immediately to mind.

Oh, I just love when people try to bring this up. For any lurkers not in the know, "It Can't Happen Here" is the title of a fictional book where America gets taken over by fascists. The implication is that no, it actually can happen here. Most people making that reference don't know anything about the book beyond that, though. They don't know who the villains of the book actually are. Want to know? It's the Rotarians. Yup, the posited group that would lead this fascist takeover of the country is the Rotarians.

Now, I'm not going to claim that fascism can never, ever take over the US. But I will go out on a limb and say that if it ever does, it won't be because of the Rotarians. And it won't be because Trump stages a coup in 2028.

Would he be able to do it? For all the back and forth, we really don't know.

Yes, we do know.

Just like the radio is at no risk of being dominated by Trump allies?

AM radio is a fringe. People go there because it's cheap, and it's cheap because there's little audience. FM radio is dominated by music, not politics, and musicians skew heavily democrat anyways.

Either way, Republican policy decisions have greatly enabled the consolidation of media outlets into the hands of fewer and fewer owners.

And they mostly tilt left. Even Fox is a lot less conservative than it used to be. Their bias is corporatism, not conservatism.

Because the overall media biases in the US quite favor Republicans, to say the least.

Bwahahahaha!

No. That might be the stupidest thing you've said.

Mmm. There's a qualitative difference here that you seem to be intent on ignoring.

This is special pleading.

 

[ahhell]

Some, sure. There's a real gap between what Trump wants and what he can actually accomplish, after all.



All 11? Not in my experience, honestly, unless you're picking at outliers. Stuff like Trump getting 2 scoops of ice cream and everyone else getting one and the covfefe tweet that was purposefully made into a bigger thing by the Trump Administration were very petty and undignified, but pointedly minor.

Stuff like "Russia, if you're listening..." and all the rest of Trump actions to get Russia to do that, casually given Putin blackmail on himself during his campaign, his long history of trying to get in on Russia's corrupt business scene and pandering to Russia's leaders, immediately trying to end sanctions on Russia unilaterally, unlawfully delaying further Russian sanctions (at least until they could be used to offset the image of Trump being walked all over by Putin), casually giving away top secret information to the Russian ambassador as if it were small talk, regurgitating Russian propaganda seemingly out of nowhere, his secret calls and meetings with Putin that he went to extraordinary lengths to hide even from his own Administration... There's lots, lots more, but I'll stop there. All 11? No. Nazi? No. Is all that and more very much worthy of being a basis for concern, unlike tin foil hat CTs? Absolutely.

Even when it comes to the concerns expressed about Trump attempting to pull off a military coup expressed here, though... the words "It Can't Happen Here!" come immediately to mind. Would he be able to do it? For all the back and forth, we really don't know. Would he try? It's uncomfortably likely. His previous Administration was already far too notorious for engaging in government purges and favoring loyalists over competence, as it was, and it's been made it rather clear that the intent is to ramp those efforts up, if given the opportunity. He may be incompetent and there's a good chance that he would fail again if he attempted such, but the damage likely to be done in the process is not some joke.

Listen, I generally don't disagree with except that I really do think a big part of his opposition takes it way to far. Things like the kids in cages story which used photos of kids in cages from the previous administration to make the point, sure it shouldn't have happened but it also happened in a similar fashion under Obama. Obama was in zone 3 and trump in Zone 5 and a good portion of the opposition acted like it was a brand new level of evil. The Ukraine phone call, bad yes but it really wasn't that different from the Obama administrations trying to pressure Ukraine to fire a corrupt pol from a few years earlier. It was worse and almost certainly motivated by a desire to smear biden but it wasn't a brand new sort of bad. I think if he is elected, we will have for years of incompetence and law suits that the administration loses. I think there will be a stream of bad, illegal, and/or unconstitutional actions. I think his and his administration's incompetence will be its saving grace. But he's not a NAZI, the primary reason he wanted to stay in office is his ego couldn't take losing. There's no way he can get enough of the military on side to actually stay in office and he probably won't want to, assuming he hasn't had a heart attack or stroke by then anyway. Acting like his election will be akin to Caesars dictatorship or Hitler being the next chancellor is just going to help get him elected.

The left's over reaction to Trump isn't just outliers. It happens all the time. Even the good people on all sides comment wasn't what it was made out to be. He didn't actually say, white supremacists are good people. In context he was talking about tearing down statues but its trump in the next sentence he was talking about the white supremecist march. So, he makes it easy for sure.