Merged 2024 Election Thread

[ahhell]

You left out the part where Trump said "Peacefully and Patriotically". That in itself makes your narrative untrustworthy. You ever wonder why they ask you for "The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth" when being sworn in to give legal testimony?

And you left out the bit about what would convince you not to vote for trump. Aside from encouraging a mob to peacefully and patriotically march on the congress and convince them to change the election? What about the bit where he tried to pretend the election was stolen and his numerous lawsuits were rejected by judges he appointed? What about his pretending that he didn't lose the election, what about his pretending he didn't have a bunch of classified documents?

Literally, what would convince you not to vote for trump? How bad does he have to be?

To be clear, I think he didn't commit some sort of insurrection, I think the various legal cases in NY are utter crap. I think he probably shouldn't be charged with mishandling classified docs on account of everyone else doing it. He is guilty of obstruction by not giving them back when asked, he is guilty of trying to subvert the election.

 

[Stacyhs]

snipped
To be clear, I think he didn't commit some sort of insurrection, I think the various legal cases in NY are utter crap. I think he probably shouldn't be charged with mishandling classified docs on account of everyone else doing it. He is guilty of obstruction by not giving them back when asked, he is guilty of trying to subvert the election.

Trump is charged with mishandling for more than just having them, the charges include that he "repeatedly enlisted aides and lawyers to help him hide records demanded by investigators and cavalierly showed off a Pentagon “plan of attack” and classified map" in July, 2021 to a writer, a publisher and two of Trump’s staff members. In April, 2021,

Trump allegedly discussed potentially sensitive information about U.S. nuclear submarines with a member of his Mar-a-Lago Club -- an Australian billionaire who then allegedly shared the information with scores of others, including more than a dozen foreign officials, several of his own employees, and a handful of journalists, according to sources familiar with the matter.

According to (Anthony) Pratt's account, as described by the sources, Pratt told Trump he believed Australia should start buying its submarines from the United States, to which an excited Trump -- "leaning" toward Pratt as if to be discreet -- then told Pratt two pieces of information about U.S. submarines: the supposed exact number of nuclear warheads they routinely carry, and exactly how close they supposedly can get to a Russian submarine without being detected.

In emails and conversations after meeting with Trump, Pratt described Trump's remarks to at least 45 others, including six journalists, 11 of his company's employees, 10 Australian officials, and three former Australian prime ministers, the sources told ABC News.

Did Biden or Pence show classified documents to or discuss classified information with people without clearances after leaving office? Trump did.

He's actually been charged with conspiracy to obstruct justice along with Nauta and De Oliveira.
"Trump and Nauta had already been charged with obstruction over the moving of boxes, but now the latest charges add a new dimension to the obstruction case that goes beyond hiding the documents themselves."

 

[Dr.Sid]

"Trump plays Social Media, Hollywood and the Fake News like a fine violin."

True, he does. And Trump cultists don't see just how fine he's playing them by using those things to spread his lies, divisiveness, and attacks on democracy.

Sure. Giving him free time in TV won't help though. And it was not just few seconds .. every news station reported on it. World wide.

 

[Stacyhs]

Sure. Giving him free time in TV won't help though. And it was not just few seconds .. every news station reported on it. World wide.

I have no problem with that. Frankly, giving him free TV time when he gets humiliated through his own actions is just fine with me.

 

[Aridas]

*sigh*

New poll: 63% of Republicans have no problem with the RNC paying Trump's legal bills

38% approve, 25% don't care. Only 26% oppose.

Smacks of corruption and opposition to the Rule of Law, but hey, the more money that gets wasted on Trump's self-inflicted legal woes, the less there is to help the party as a whole.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

And you left out the bit about what would convince you not to vote for trump. Aside from encouraging a mob to peacefully and patriotically march on the congress and convince them to change the election? What about the bit where he tried to pretend the election was stolen and his numerous lawsuits were rejected by judges he appointed? What about his pretending that he didn't lose the election, what about his pretending he didn't have a bunch of classified documents?

Literally, what would convince you not to vote for trump? How bad does he have to be?

To be clear, I think he didn't commit some sort of insurrection, I think the various legal cases in NY are utter crap. I think he probably shouldn't be charged with mishandling classified docs on account of everyone else doing it. He is guilty of obstruction by not giving them back when asked, he is guilty of trying to subvert the election.

You're saying the quiet part out loud. The parts that demonstrate political persecution and the destruction of Democracy all in the name of preventing a candidate from running for President. (It's OK, everyone else knows it too.)

Regarding the last part, since when does disagreeing with election results constitute a crime? If it is, prosecute every Democrat that ever lost an election.

 

[Dr.Sid]

I have no problem with that. Frankly, giving him free TV time when he gets humiliated through his own actions is just fine with me.

Pointing out he's being prosecuted is not humiliation in eyes of somebody who believes he's prosecuted unjustly. So far all his legal trouble did exactly nothing to his polling numbers .. or they improved them slightly. That's not the way to beat him.
I'm not saying start worship the new messiah, I'm saying take the threat seriously. Trump has a potential to end the civilization.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

You're saying the quiet part out loud. The parts that demonstrate political persecution and the destruction of Democracy all in the name of preventing a candidate from running for President. (It's OK, everyone else knows it too.)

Regarding the last part, since when does disagreeing with election results constitute a crime? If it is, prosecute every Democrat that ever lost an election.

Ooo, check and mate! Serious question: do you think we’re stupid?

“Political persecution and the destruction of Democracy.” Comedy gold.

 

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I have no problem with that. Frankly, giving him free TV time when he gets humiliated through his own actions is just fine with me.

Pointing out he's being prosecuted is not humiliation in eyes of somebody who believes he's prosecuted unjustly. So far all his legal trouble did exactly nothing to his polling numbers .. or they improved them slightly. That's not the way to beat him.
I'm not saying start worship the new messiah, I'm saying take the threat seriously. Trump has a potential to end the civilization.

Kimmel wasn't "pointing out he was being prosecuted"; everyone already knows that. He humiliated Trump with his quick jibe after Trump insulted him.
We weren't discussing his polling numbers, either. You said, "Giving him free time in TV won't help though,: which is what I responded to. I never addressed his polling numbers or claimed that was the "way to beat him".

What makes you think Kimmel and I don't take his threat seriously? I certainly do and there is no evidence Kimmel doesn't, either. Kimmel is a comedian and he uses comedy to humiliate Trump. I say, more power to him.

 

[Stacyhs]

Ooo, check and mate! Serious question: do you think we’re stupid?

“Political persecution and the destruction of Democracy.” Comedy gold.

Unbelievable, isn't it? The really sad part of this is that Trump supporters really think they're smart. Dunning-Kruger at its finest.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

If the fact that Trump cheated simple contractors working for him out of the money he owed them, countless times in his career, doesn't make you despise the man, I don't know what will.

Trump has made his wealth by stealing from the kind of people who make up his base.
He thinks of them only as walking ATMs and canned applause, but not actual humans.

 

[johnny karate]

To be clear, I think he didn't commit some sort of insurrection, I think the various legal cases in NY are utter crap. I think he probably shouldn't be charged with mishandling classified docs on account of everyone else doing it. He is guilty of obstruction by not giving them back when asked, he is guilty of trying to subvert the election.

Trump wasn’t charged with “mishandling” the documents. He was charged with willfully retaining, withholding, and concealing them. Which he very clearly did, and Biden and Pence did not. Sorry to spoil your bothsides-ing with facts.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

That’s why there will never be a single universal flat tax. That would basically tie legislators’ hands to either raising or lowering the rate. No deductions or credits to mess with. Doesn’t matter which party they’re in. They’ll never tie their own hands.

The reason why there shouldn't be a universal flat tax: It robs from the poor to pay the rich.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

*sigh*

New poll: 63% of Republicans have no problem with the RNC paying Trump's legal bills

38% approve, 25% don't care. Only 26% oppose.

Smacks of corruption and opposition to the Rule of Law, but hey, the more money that gets wasted on Trump's self-inflicted legal woes, the less there is to help the party as a whole.

Having watched youtuber Dead Domain's two videos on CPAC, it's clear the repugs are in the "power only exists to help us and hurt our enemies" stage of wannabe dictators.

They were explicitly discussing how laws should be written to hurt their political enemies only.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Unbelievable, isn't it? The really sad part of this is that Trump supporters really think they're smart. Dunning-Kruger at its finest.

Let's not over-generalize. I'm open to the idea that somewhere out there are a few Trump supporters who know they're stupid.

 

[gabeygoat]

Trump supporters who know they're stupid.

Those would be the smart ones!
=]

 

[Aridas]

Amusing as the Trump supporter bashing is, I think it's worth a momentary reminder that a lot of Trump supporters are normally intelligent and generally praiseworthy people. That they may have fundamentally different values or effectively turn off their brains/critical thinking when it comes to politics doesn't automatically detract from that.

With that said, "Do you think we're stupid?" is a question that's come to mind, too, a bunch of times when I hear what some of them are pushing. Either they think that I'm stupid, they're being stupid when it comes to that, or they're trolling for whatever reason. There's really no other option. Regnad Kcin called that one well.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Ooo, check and mate! Serious question: do you think we’re stupid?

“Political persecution and the destruction of Democracy.” Comedy gold.

I have decided to not allow myself to respond with personal attacks or personal insults to other forum members. When one lowers themselves to that level, it's an open admission that they cannot debate with fact and must resort to logical fallacy arguments.

In other words, when the response becomes a personal insult, you lose the debate at that very moment. If your Ideology cannot withstand factual debate, it's not worthy of the attempt.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I have decided to not allow myself to respond with personal attacks or personal insults to other forum members. When one lowers themselves to that level, it's an open admission that they cannot debate with fact and must resort to logical fallacy arguments.

In other words, when the response becomes a personal insult, you lose the debate at that very moment. If your Ideology cannot withstand factual debate, it's not worthy of the attempt.

Well said.

I hope you apply this principle to political candidates as well. Do you?

 

[Aridas]

I have decided to not allow myself to respond with personal attacks or personal insults to other forum members. When one lowers themselves to that level, it's an open admission that they cannot debate with fact and must resort to logical fallacy arguments.

In other words, when the response becomes a personal insult, you lose the debate at that very moment. If your Ideology cannot withstand factual debate, it's not worthy of the attempt.

Alright, then. How should one deal with it when someone asks a question like, "since when does disagreeing with election results constitute a crime?" when NO ONE even remotely claimed that "disagreeing with election results" was a crime in the first place and minimizing the events actually in question as simply "disagreeing with election results" is profoundly dishonest? Even moreso when those actions are being falsely equated with "every Democrat who ever lost an election." Either you think that we're stupid, you have chosen to be stupid, or you're trolling for whatever reason. There's no other real option.