The Forum Site - Join the conversation
You don't always shop on Amazon, but when you do using this link you're helping to support TFS!
Forums:
Politics

Nov 3, 2020 - Jan 3, 2021

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5 · >>
chaski 8 minutes ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#31New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 02:01:16
@bob_the_fisherman Said

Well played. If we had a hat doffing smiley I'd use it here... as it is this will have to do.

He said there were fine people on both sides...


Trump was NOT taking about a "debate".

Trump was talking about a set of protesters (who were not debating each other).

And he was saying that the side that was made up of white supremacists and neo nazis also were made up of "fine people".

No, Bob... they are not.

You, and Trump, are happy to condemn the "left" while making excuses for the extreme right.

However, you do not have to like the left to realize that white supremacists are not, ultimately, good people.

But here, again, you are trying to steer the topic toward the only things you like to talk about relative to politics; i.e. Hillary is bad, Comey is bad, the FBI are bad, the left is bad and Trump is their poor poor little victim.
bob_the_fisherman On November 15, 2019
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#32New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 02:07:55
@chaski Said

And he was saying that the side that was made up of white supremacists and neo nazis also were made up of "fine people".


He was saying there were fine people there. Now, I follow some people who were there, and I consider them fine. Am I now a Nazi?


@chaski Said
Trump is their poor poor little victim.


I say the media lie because I know they lie. So do you (know the media lie, I mean). And they lied about his Charlottesville comments. I think he handled it badly and he should have been quicker in condemning what happened. However, I don't see the need to find malice in everything he does that I don't support. And I never say Trump is a victim as that would be absurd.
chaski 8 minutes ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#33New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 02:10:21
@bob_the_fisherman Said

He was saying there were fine people there.



BS
chaski 8 minutes ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#34New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 02:18:20



So Bob, trying to bring you back on topic:

What do YOU (bob_the_fisherman) think that Trump will do IF he loses the 2020 election?

A. Accept the democratic results?
B. Deny the democratic results?
C. Something else (feel free to describe it).

And, IF he loses the 2020 election, will he

A. Leave office gracefully.
B. Refuse to leave office.
C. Leave office, but before doing that pardon some or all of his friends and colleagues and/or family members who seem (right or wrong) to be facing legal trouble?
D. Something else (feel free to describe it).

Now, do try to answer without referring to Hillary, Comey, the FBI, leftists, CNN, MSM, and/or the fall of the West.

Try to focus on the topic, which is what Trump will or won't do... given that this is speculation and hypothetical.
darkman666 On about 1 hour ago




Saint Louis, Missouri
#35New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 02:26:35
C. Leave office, but before doing that pardon some or all of his friends and colleagues and/or family members who seem (right or wrong) to be facing legal trouble?

if you think if bozo can do this for his people in 2020?

you can wonder when Nixon was in office, and pardon his people. you wonder if Nixon refused resigned. would Nixon still want to stayed in office or simply quit his office?
bob_the_fisherman On November 15, 2019
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#36New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 03:01:03
@chaski Said

So Bob, trying to bring you back on topic:

What do YOU (bob_the_fisherman) think that Trump will do IF he loses the 2020 election?

A. Accept the democratic results?
B. Deny the democratic results?
C. Something else (feel free to describe it).


I think the hysteria is severely overblown. But that is what TDS seems to do to people. They seem incapable of seeing our great God-Emperor Trump as human (and in a way I understand that. His awesome is glorious to behold, but I think he is predominantly human with some god-like tendencies).


Ok, now that I have thrown burly in the water, I'll answer the question more seriously.

If he does run (and I'm not entirely convinced he will), but if he does I think he may well question the legitimacy of the election. Are you saying this is evil or wrong somehow? I think that is happening now, isn't it? Aren't people questioning the last election?

I am not American so honestly don't know the answer to this, but can a US President refuse to accept an election result and just continue in power? Wouldn't there be some constitutional remedies against that?

Will he pardon some people? Probably. But I probably would too based on what we've seen so far - not those who legitimately did wrong. I would not support that. But those who have been found guilty of lying in an investigation into a thing no one believes in - yeah, pardon away.

Ultimately as I do not see Trump as the embodiment of all evil I think he would step aside. He might whine about it, but I think he would follow convention (if not the Constitution). I could be wrong. Like everyone here I do not know Trump personally. I know what the media say, but I have listened to them, then listened to him and seen how severely and how often they lie, so I give Trump credence and integrity way beyond what I give the media.
bob_the_fisherman On November 15, 2019
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#37New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 03:36:10
@DiscordTiger Said

Seriously though, i think we kind of expect our protests to have a little violence because some people are asshats.

but it takes more than that to be a real riot.


Yep, I get that sense. Americans takes things way more seriously than Aussies.

I honestly can't remember our last political stoush that led to even a bin being overturned, let alone broken windows or burning cars. I think most of us (certainly the "Aussies" among us), would rather just have a beer and insult each other. I think rioting would be fun, but it's too hot here most of the time and after driving for a few hours to get to a place worth rioting in you need beer, and the pubs always have the air con going, and it's gonna be hot and dusty outside
chaski 8 minutes ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#38New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 04:03:20
@bob_the_fisherman Said

I think the hysteria is severely overblown. But that is what TDS seems to do to people. They seem incapable of seeing our great God-Emperor Trump as human (and in a way I understand that. His awesome is glorious to behold, but I think he is predominantly human with some god-like tendencies).


Ok, now that I have thrown burly in the water, I'll answer the question more seriously.

If he does run (and I'm not entirely convinced he will), but if he does I think he may well question the legitimacy of the election. Are you saying this is evil or wrong somehow? I think that is happening now, isn't it? Aren't people questioning the last election?

I am not American so honestly don't know the answer to this, but can a US President refuse to accept an election result and just continue in power? Wouldn't there be some constitutional remedies against that?

Will he pardon some people? Probably. But I probably would too based on what we've seen so far - not those who legitimately did wrong. I would not support that. But those who have been found guilty of lying in an investigation into a thing no one believes in - yeah, pardon away.

Ultimately as I do not see Trump as the embodiment of all evil I think he would step aside. He might whine about it, but I think he would follow convention (if not the Constitution). I could be wrong. Like everyone here I do not know Trump personally. I know what the media say, but I have listened to them, then listened to him and seen how severely and how often they lie, so I give Trump credence and integrity way beyond what I give the media.



> If he does run... I think he may well question the legitimacy of the election.

> Will he pardon some people? Probably.

> I think he would step aside.... He might whine about it, but I think he would follow convention.




It takes you a lot of words to say the simplest of things, it is almost like you are trying to hide your thoughts.
bob_the_fisherman On November 15, 2019
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#39New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 04:25:57
@chaski Said

It takes you a lot of words to say the simplest of things, it is almost like you are trying to hide your thoughts.



I remember fondly those days of yore wherein you had a sense of humour. Do you?
Eaglebauer On July 23, 2019
Moderator
Deleted



Saint Louis, Missouri
#40New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 13:29:04
@DiscordTiger Said

It seems like some members of the american right (the same crew I get all my bats*** AOC rumors from) -- have re-written history that Hillary did not accept election results and was leading a riot or something. Seriously someone mentioned that this week...not sure if it was something going around at CPAC.

But she gave her concession speech and then went and hid the woods for a week or two... I mean even the recount questions that happened in certain states was asked for by Jill Stein, and it was paid for by lot of small individual donations, and even on some of the "secret democrat groups" when we were talking about it and organizing it wasn't something being lead by hillary, she was in the woods. (like literally in the woods, the pics exist)

it's different for citizens to have feels and be upset at an outcome, that isn't the candidate challenging the results. I think some of their fears of a trump administration, were legit. He's changes laws and practices that have had real impact on the daily lives of many citizens.


I think people see Hillary as the figurehead for what went on though. Is that fair? Maybe, maybe not...but the public tends to use synecdoche (cashing in my ten dollar words) in politics and when they refer to Hillary in 2016 are often referring to "the left." It's the same with people crediting Obama for the capture of Bin Laden. He didn't take a rifle and go capture him. He was in office when it happened.

I agree it's wrong to say that Hillary was refusing to accept the results personally, at least initially. But when the Green Party managed to get a recount on the table, Clinton did jump at the chance, didn't she? As soon as the momentum was built behind the idea by Stein, the Clinton campaign did in fact enthusiastically join in pushing for recounts in several key states.

The campaign used a lot of colorful language to dodge any commitment to contesting but in the end...Clinton did push for a recount...that's just a fact.

Rioting in the streets? Nah...that didn't happen. A lot of protesting...a lot of people getting upset...which is nothing to call anyone out for I believe. But no, no rioting, I agree.
chaski 8 minutes ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#41New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 15:55:11
@Eaglebauer Said


But when the Green Party managed to get a recount on the table, Clinton did jump at the chance, didn't she?




Yes she did.

However, I find it interesting that Trump repeatedly stated that there was voting fraud in the 2016 election. In fact, I'm pretty sure he used the words "massive voting fraud". Even though he won.

So if the losers say there was voting fraud and the winner says there was voting fraud, then both sides agree that there was voting fraud... i.e. Hillary and Trump agreed that there was voting fraud.

In that case shouldn't a recount be necessary?






Note: The reality is that there is most likely "voting fraud" in every election. HOWEVER the numbers of fraudulent votes are so vastly minute as to be insignificant.
Eaglebauer On July 23, 2019
Moderator
Deleted



Saint Louis, Missouri
#42New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 16:01:09
@chaski Said

Yes she did.

However, I find it interesting that Trump repeatedly stated that there was voting fraud in the 2016 election. In fact, I'm pretty sure he used the words "massive voting fraud". Even though he won.

So if the losers say there was voting fraud and the winner says there was voting fraud, then both sides agree that there was voting fraud... i.e. Hillary and Trump agreed that there was voting fraud.

In that case shouldn't a recount be necessary?






Note: The reality is that there is most likely "voting fraud" in every election. HOWEVER the numbers of fraudulent votes are so vastly minute as to be insignificant.



Sure.

That's not really relevant to anything I was saying, but sure.
chaski 8 minutes ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#43New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 16:09:23
Trump is just doing what he did last time, though starting earlier in the process.

Before the 2016 election Trump repeatedly claimed that the election was fixed against him; i.e. that there was going to be voting fraud. Republicans/conservatives (at least many of them) jumped on this idea and clung to it.

(Side note: I find it pretty funny that many Republicans/conservatives now act like they knew Trump was going to win all along, and that the Democrats/liberals were the only ones who ever believed otherwise. This of course was not true.)

After the election, Trump repeatedly claimed that the election was fixed against him; i.e. that there was going to be voting fraud. Republicans/conservatives (at least many of them) have clung to this idea like it is their favorite beloved teddy bear.

And now in the lead up to 2020, Trump is claiming that the election will be fixed against him; i.e. that there was going to be voting fraud. And now Republicans/conservatives (at least many of them) are once again jumping on the proverbial band wagon.

Have Democrats/liberals complained about the results of the 2016 election? Absolutely, and in much the same way that Republicans/conservatives complained about the 2008 & 2012 elections. The difference that I see is that the Republican/conservatives(in general) and Trump (in particular) seem to be using the idea of "voting fraud" as a tool to undermine the legitimacy of our elections.

And yet, the mid-term election in North Carolina stands out as a rare example of voting fraud that almost changed the election results and now is resulting in a do over... and it was perpetrated by Republicans, not Democrats/liberals and there were no illegal aliens voting... no bus loads of illegal voters brought in.
Leon On December 05, 2019




San Diego, California
#44New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 16:20:30
A recount is usually triggered in elections here if the result is close enough to suspect that the result could be different in terms of who would win if every vote in that jurisdiction is re-examined for accuracy and validity.

Hillary says the voting fraud was a result of Russian propaganda influencing the minds of voters. I’m not sure if a recount would even be relevant in this scenario, if even possible since simply looking at the submitted ballots again in a recount would not, in any way, shape, or form, determine if the people submitting their ballots would have voted differently if they didn’t read Russian-influenced advertising or participated in their fake rallies. A case could be made that the Russians directly infiltrated computer systems that handled the tallies, but I don’t think that is what Hillary was saying happened, nor did intelligence investigations reveal anything of that extent.

Trump says the voting fraud was millions of illegals and non-citizens voting in an election where only citizens can vote. This probably could be dug into. However, again, only recounts would occur in closely contested states, and would ultimately only matter if the outcome would have affected the overall electoral college victor (see Florida in 2000). So, while Trump complained about voting fraud in 2016, it was only to promote the false narrative that he would have won the popular vote, for the mere purpose of stoking his ego further. He won the electoral college anyways. Investigations have been conducted anyways, despite that, and very little in terms of this kind of voter fraud was found or substantiated.

I seriously doubt that any claims of voter fraud in 2020 will result in findings that could change any outcome.
Leon On December 05, 2019




San Diego, California
#45New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 16:35:23
To add to this, serious protests against the election of Trump primarily focused on the electoral college system itself and the need to change it to better reflect the will of the population, given that Hillary won the popular vote by a wide margin, and also focused on the illegal Russian influence and the need to tighten security in that regard. Neither was a way to get a re-do of the election and I think most realized that. It was more a protest for action in future elections.

This is also probably why Trump felt the need to claim voter fraud on his end, as he saw these protests as a threat to his legitimacy of winning the election from an American mindset acceptance standpoint. And it of course explains why he has said little/done little about the need to combat foreign influence in our elections.
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5 · >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Politics Forum - Some Rudeness Allowed

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   News & Current Events
Tue May 10, 2016 @ 01:18
558 14523
New posts   Society & Lifestyles
Wed Mar 30, 2011 @ 15:30
29 7695
New posts   Business & Money
Mon Dec 31, 2012 @ 18:49
69 6122
New posts   Gender Issues
Thu Jan 26, 2017 @ 05:09
63 3256
New posts   Politics
Fri Jan 16, 2015 @ 19:48
31 4292