US Presidential Election 2020

briany

droidus wrote: »

What does 'collapse' mean exactly? The US isn't going to cease to exist, but if Trump loses (the most likely outcome) and essentially stages a soft coup, then the resulting chaos will cause irreparable damage to country that's already close to disintegration. It's already a failed state in many respects but its certainly possible to see thing sliding into outright authoritarianism, with all that entails.

'Fascinating' isnt a word id use. The consequences will be utterly disastrous for tens of millions in the US and the repercussions will be felt globally.

I would use the word fascinating, because something can be horrible yet fascinating at the same time. It's why so many people rubberneck the aftermath of a horrible road collision when driving past.

bobbyy gee

trump will not leave office

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/04/sanders-trump-refuses-leave-office-409242

Water John

The 70 days between voting and swearing in gives a breathing space during which the result can be contested but also processed by the people. That may be advantage in this case.

droidus

briany wrote: »

I would use the word fascinating, because something can be horrible yet fascinating at the same time. It's why so many people rubberneck the aftermath of a horrible road collision when driving past.

Each to their own I guess, but there's plenty of fairly recent historical examples to look at, and none of them are pretty. When we consider that the death squads are raring at the bit and camps are already operational, it's not hard to see where this could go.

namloc1980

Water John wrote: »

The 70 days between voting and swearing in gives a breathing space during which the result can be contested but also processed by the people. That may be advantage in this case.

There isn't that much time. The electoral college votes are cast and certified on the 14th December which is just under 6 weeks after the election.

paul71

So a Nancy Pelosi presidency? At what stage does that come into effect?

Water John

Not sure if the 14th is absolute for the Electoral College?
I think Pelosi comes into play after the the 20th Jan as Trump's 1st Term ends then.

looksee

bobbyy gee wrote: »

trump will not leave office

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/04/sanders-trump-refuses-leave-office-409242

That article is from April and is an opinion piece. It might be a correct/accurate opinion but it does not make a definitive new statement about Trump, contrary to what your post implies.

Water John

looksee wrote: »

That article is from April and is an opinion piece. It might be a correct/accurate opinion but it does not make a definitive new statement about Trump, contrary to what your post implies.

I made the same error originally. It's from the 4th Sept, (American Notation)

paul71

looksee wrote: »

That article is from April and is an opinion piece. It might be a correct/accurate opinion but it does not make a definitive new statement about Trump, contrary to what your post implies.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2020/sep/23/donald-trump-says-he-expects-us-election-to-end-up-at-supreme-court-video

This is today.

namloc1980

Water John wrote: »

Not sure if the 14th is absolute for the Electoral College?
I think Pelosi comes into play after the the 20th Jan as Trump's 1st Term ends then.

The date for the electoral college votes is set down in law with no wriggle room.

TomOnBoard

Water John wrote: »

The 70 days between voting and swearing in gives a breathing space during which the result can be contested but also processed by the people. That may be advantage in this case.

Once the Electoral College votes in Mid-December, the election will have been decided, regardless of any outstanding issues or challenges that may still be in train at that point. Theres huge potential for States to ignore popular vote counts and decide that their EC vote ought to be cast in a way that flies in the face of
what their people have voted for.

Take Georgia and Florida, for example.. its possible for Trump to lose in one or both States on a popular vote basis, and for the State political machinery to ignore that decision by the people. Lets say that Trump's people continue to agitate against any counts that take place after election day... that would remove the votes of potentially millions of Democrat voters because they use mail-in or absentee votes thay wont have been counted by the night of Nov 3.

And, when you add together all the intimidation, voter suppression, felon dis-enfranchisement, Postal Service sabotage - all of these are strategies whose effect will be that more votes than ever will take days or longer to count. Those strategies are 100% focused on stopping people who vote Democrat from having their vote counted.

Over the last couple of months I've read so many piece saying "Oh the Republicans can't/won't steal the election for reason x or y or z" and they list a bunch of basically niceties and norms that are usually followed. If there is any way to keep the White House they absolutely will do it. How many things have we thought couldn't/wouldn't happen and naahh, they just run through it anyway.

Quin_Dub

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Once the Electoral College votes in Mid-December, the election will have been decided, regardless of any outstanding issues or challenges that may still be in train at that point. Theres huge potential for States to ignore popular vote counts and decide that their EC vote ought to be cast in a way that flies in the face of
what their people have voted for.

Take Georgia and Florida, for example.. its possible for Trump to lose in one or both States on a popular vote basis, and for the State political machinery to ignore that decision by the people. Lets say that Trump's people continue to agitate against any counts that take place after election day... that would remove the votes of potentially millions of Democrat voters because they use mail-in or absentee votes thay wont have been counted by the night of Nov 3.

And, when you add together all the intimidation, voter suppression, felon dis-enfranchisement, Postal Service sabotage - all of these are strategies whose effect will be that more votes than ever will take days or longer to count. Those strategies are 100% focused on stopping people who vote Democrat from having their vote counted.

Technically - Not exactly , the date in December (The 1st Monday after the second Wednesday!) is the date by which time all States have to send forward their confirmed Electoral college voters.

However as per the Atlantic article we could have a whole host of issues with that - For example in the event of a contest over the result in somewhere like Michigan with a Dem Governor but a GOP controlled house/senate - Technically speaking they could each, with some legitimacy send forward voters , one giving the Michigan EC votes to Biden , the other to Trump.

The EC votes aren't actually counted until the New House & Senate take their seats in January (3rd I think) when the leader of the Senate - Which would still be Pence then goes through the votes - That's where it starts to get weird though. He could decide to accept the GOP voters from Michigan , which the Dems would object to or he could just say "Michigan can't decide so they are excluded" so no one can reach the 270 mark.

If the Dems take the Senate then they simply vote down the "rogue" GOP EC voters and Biden is President , equally , if the GOP retain the Senate they could do the opposite , but there are things that the Democrats as leader of the House to stymie that but the Atlantic article goes into all of the utterly batsh!t crazy rules and laws that potentially come in to play , but essentially , if neither side concedes and you have contested EC slates coming out of a few states , which is entirely possible - It will be a an absolute Cluster.

Once again exposes the fact that they actually don't have rules to deal with a scenario where people don't behave honourably.

Zubeneschamali

I have no doubt that when Trump talks about throwing out ballots, refusing a peaceful transition and continuing in office for several more terms he is not joking. He is not exaggerating. He really means it. But he is an idiot.

If aides are jollying him along by telling him this stuff, it is because their own numbers are telling them he's already lost.

With an epic beating staring him in the face, Trump is demanding that they come up with something, anything. So they produce these plans for Red State legislatures to defy the vote and send Trump electors to Washington.

None of that will happen if the result is clear - the Administration will just melt away. The transition will be a joke: Bidens team have nothing to learn from Trumps team who will be busy trying to loot more stuff and stay ahead of the law.

It'll end with a whimper.

everlast75

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I have no doubt that when Trump talks about throwing out ballots, refusing a peaceful transition and continuing in office for several more terms he is not joking. He is not exaggerating. He really means it. But he is an idiot.

If aides are jollying him along by telling him this stuff, it is because their own numbers are telling them he's already lost.

With an epic beating staring him in the face, Trump is demanding that they come up with something, anything. So they produce these plans for Red State legislatures to defy the vote and send Trump electors to Washington.

None of that will happen if the result is clear - the Administration will just melt away. The transition will be a joke: Bidens team have nothing to learn from Trumps team who will be busy trying to loot more stuff and stay ahead of the law.

It'll end with a whimper.

"If the result is clear"...

If.

And what if it isn't.

He has said he is putting a SCOTUS in place to help him if it goes to the Court.

He has refused to admit that he will accept the result.

He is putting loyal people in place at the ballot box to help sway voters/delay any result.

He is repeatedly spreading voter disinformation.

He's got an AG who will do his bidding and Republican Congress and Senators who refuse to reign him in.

He has been impeached and it makes **** all difference to him.

And yet people still bat it all away as if it means nothing.

Those people need a good shake to snap them out of apathy.

This is unprecedented.

Stop acting like he's one guy at a bar spouting b****x.

seamus

namloc1980 wrote: »

I can't see the US collapsing however there is the increasing possibility that there is going to be a constitutional crisis after the election.

Working in computers, I see this odd parallel between the Trump presidency and some common themes that I see.

There's a concept that if you take backups of your data, but you never test them to see if they can be used, then you may as well have no backups at all. Because you don't actually know if they're any good.

Likewise when you have a written procedure for disaster recovery; a step-by-step document on how to rebuild your computer infrastructure in the event of a major disaster; then it's worthless if it's never actually been done, never actually been tested.

U.S. democracy looks a lot like this. For the last four years, we have continuously heard commentators say, "Trump can't do X, it's against the consitution", or "The US government is structured in a way that X can't happen".

And then Trump does it, and nothing happens. All of the failsafes and procedures, the "checks and balances" that Americans have so proudly talked about for decades, failed. They were written on paper only, they've turned out to be useless. He has been impeached, and nothing has happened. He has committed multiple federal crimes in and out of office, including treason, and the government has ignored it.

Now Trump is talking about a coup. That's not hyperbole. He's talked about refusing to honour the results of the election if it doesn't go his way.

Fence-sitters and conservatives will claim, "He can't do that, the systems won't allow it". But we now know the "systems", the checks and the failsafes, are all on paper. They've never been tested, may have only been used once in 250 years. And that makes them worthless.

Americans now have to conduct themselves under the assumption that their democracy has no safety net. Because it doesn't. They can't sit on their hands and trust that the country will survive on God-like admiration for the work done by a bunch of young men who died 200 years ago.

Getting Trump out of office would be a good start, a good way of bringing stability, but like you say will be the beginning of a whole other chapter of pain as the 30m-odd morons that support Trump believe their Messiah to have been illegally evicted from office.

Chips Lovell

Trump saying he won't accept the result is irrelevant. The only issue is whether anyone will support him in not accepting it. And I think there's precious little chance of that. Nobody supports him out of loyalty, only out of self interest. And once he stops being useful, that support will melt away.

Subverting an election would be a tall order for even a strong presidency. Trump has been a weak, ineffectual president and he's continually tried to paper over that with bluster.

Quin_Dub

Chips Lovell wrote: »

Trump saying he won't accept the result is irrelevant. The only issue is whether anyone will support him in not accepting it. And I think there's precious little chance of that. Nobody supports him out of loyalty, only out of self interest. And once he stops being useful, that support will melt away.

Subverting an election would be a tall order for even a strong presidency. Trump has been a weak, ineffectual president and he's continually tried to paper over that with bluster.

I agree with you in the event of a clear , early victory for Biden.. but.

The problem is though that if they think they can win they will support it.

Barr has shown that he fully believes in the absolute power of the Office of President.

If Trump is leading on Election night then he will kick off a torrent of court cases across multiple states challenging all of the mail-in ballots, looking to get as many of them as possible excluded - Barr will support him in this .

As result of the chicanery of McConnell during Obamas second term , Trump filled has almost 40% of the judiciary during his term , so they will be leant on HARD to rule in his favour where possible.

He is also utterly unbounded by the norms of behaviour or even the law - HE will try to get away with anything and everything.

The GOP have hired 50,000 "Poll Watchers" to go and harass voters in Democratic Party areas to try to suppress the vote. That will inevitably lead to flares up in certain places and if the local leadership are GOP I fully expect them to send in SWAT or Federal officers to further enflame the situation , closing polling stations for "Security reasons" etc. etc.

This is going to be like watching an Election from some tin-pot dictatorship in Africa or one of the 'Stans expect with nicer clothes and better TV coverage.

Zubeneschamali

everlast75 wrote: »

"If the result is clear"...

If.

And what if it isn't.

Biden has already assembled a mob of lawyers to fight court actions about counts. That is business as usual.

But this stuff about declaring fraud without evidence, throwing away ballots uncounted and sending Trump electors regardless of the vote is nonsense: it is a fairy tale Trumps handlers are feeding him to keep him functioning.

stefanovich

Have any of you considered the possibility that mail in ballots are actually very insecure? There have been multiple proven cases of fraud. Trump has a point.

He is also standing up to big tech and their obvious anti conservative bias.

He has done more for the black community than most presidents in recent history.

Cannot understand why he is so hated.

Chips Lovell

Quin_Dub wrote: »

This is going to be like watching an Election from some tin-pot dictatorship in Africa or one of the 'Stans expect with nicer clothes and better TV coverage.

And I think that's why his support will evaporate. Nobody is attached to him enough to create that kind of situation.

duploelabs

stefanovich wrote: »

Have any of you considered the possibility that mail in ballots are actually very insecure? There have been multiple proven cases of fraud. Trump has a point.

He is also standing up to big tech and their obvious anti conservative bias.

He has done more for the black community than most presidents in recent history.

Cannot understand why he is so hated.

But there hasn't been any proven case that large scale mail in voting is suspect.
He's not standing up to big tech, unless they're mean to him like tik tok.
Care to provide some citation that he's done more for the black community than recent presidents?

Quin_Dub

stefanovich wrote: »

Have any of you considered the possibility that mail in ballots are actually very insecure? There have been multiple proven cases of fraud. Trump has a point.

No they aren't and no there hasn't - Absolutely ZERO evidence to say that mail-in voting is any more open to fraud than any other from of voting.

In fact when Trumps lawyers were asked for evidence in their court case in Pennsylvania they weren't able to provide a single example of mail-in voter fraud

stefanovich wrote: »

He is also standing up to big tech and their obvious anti conservative bias.

They aren't and he isn't - There is no "bias" against Conservatives , it's a fallacy that they have repeatedly failed to prove. Conservatism just isn't that popular generally so all their algorithms simply promote things that are more popular.

That in and of itself is indeed a problem leading to greater polarisation , but it is absolutely not a bias against Conservatives.

stefanovich wrote: »

He has done more for the black community than most presidents in recent history.

He really hasn't - Yes , prior to the Pandemic , jobs were higher , they were for everybody - on the same trajectory that they had been on for the previous 6 or 7 years though , if anything job growth slowed under Trump.

His tax cuts made it worse for most people in the US - 57% of all Americans took home less money after his tax cuts than they did under Obama.

He has made things better for a very very small group of people - Mostly the top 1% and to a lesser extent the top 10% , but for everybody else , not so much.

Water John

stefanovich wrote: »

Have any of you considered the possibility that mail in ballots are actually very insecure? There have been multiple proven cases of fraud. Trump has a point.

He is also standing up to big tech and their obvious anti conservative bias.

He has done more for the black community than most presidents in recent history.

Cannot understand why he is so hated.

Duplo has answered the first three points as for the fourth, there is nothing anyone can do to explain why to you if you haven't concluded that what the US has as POTUS is a con artist.
BTW the two 'leftie' techs driving Trump's economy ie the stock market are Tesla and Apple. Bit of an irony.

looksee

stefanovich wrote: »

Have any of you considered the possibility that mail in ballots are actually very insecure? There have been multiple proven cases of fraud. Trump has a point.

He is also standing up to big tech and their obvious anti conservative bias.

He has done more for the black community than most presidents in recent history.

Cannot understand why he is so hated.

I am not sure this post is worth responding to, but I will treat it as valid -

Have any of you considered the possibility that mail in ballots are actually very insecure? There have been multiple proven cases of fraud. Trump has a point.

There is absolutely no historical evidence that mail in ballots have any significant level of fraud. There have been a few, as there probably have been a few cases of personation at walk-in polling, but nothing like enough to cause the chaos that Trump is trying to suggest.

Pennsylvania said that 30,000 'naked' votes could be counted. The Trump organisation made sure they were cancelled. The inner envelope is for the benefit of voters, so they do not feel their vote could be seen by the person opening the envelopes. But it is still a valid vote even without an inner envelope, the voter has simply chosen to make his vote preference possibly public, which he can do in daily life by wearing a MAGA hat or a Biden button. If an election worker wished to interfere with the vote all they have to do is declare a non-matching signature on any envelope that corresponds with a declared party membership record.

He is also standing up to big tech and their obvious anti conservative bias.

Could we have some examples and a rather more substantial argument please?

He has done more for the black community than most presidents in recent history.

Again, what is your evidence? Trump has said this so many times that an unthinking follower could have got the idea there is some sort of reality in it, but can we have some actual examples?

Cannot understand why he is so hated

He is fomenting hatred, creating division, running roughshod over democracy, and has clearly and unambiguously said that he will not accept the results of an election - unless he wins. He talks about the riots and destruction that will follow a Biden win while ignoring the fact that they are currently happening under his watch. He stone-walls in the face of intelligence and integrity, he despises courage and honour and conscience. What is there not to hate?

SimonTemplar

i think perhaps that the extent to which the supreme court justices nominated by Trump will allow his election lawsuits to stand without any real evidence of fraudulent ballots is not really a risk.

Unlike something like abortion which allows for some leeway on how judges interpret things, Trump's potential claims of voter fraud surely has a more binary conclusion: either there is evidence of voter fraud or there is not. If Trump's team cannot provide this evidence, than surely the judges would have to dismiss the case regardless of their political ideology.

There is also nothing in US law that says the candidate that has the most votes on election night is the winner regardless of the many postal votes still to be counted. There isn't a deadline. Again, I don't see how Trump could argue that in count.

Am I missing something or is this just typical blustering BS from Trump without any connection to reality?

looksee

The problem is the reality that is being created by the blustering BS.

mcmoustache

stefanovich wrote: »

He is also standing up to big tech and their obvious anti conservative bias.

Quin_Dub wrote: »

They aren't and he isn't - There is no "bias" against Conservatives , it's a fallacy that they have repeatedly failed to prove. Conservatism just isn't that popular generally so all their algorithms simply promote things that are more popular.

That in and of itself is indeed a problem leading to greater polarisation , but it is absolutely not a bias against Conservatives.

Just to add to this. Here are the top 10 performing posts on facebook in the US every day.

Does that look like anti-conservative bias or the opposite?

https://twitter.com/FacebooksTop10?lang=en

droidus

Quin_Dub wrote: »

This is going to be like watching an Election from some tin-pot dictatorship in Africa or one of the 'Stans expect with nicer clothes and better TV coverage.

Its been like that for quite some time though, certainly since 2000, this is just ramping it up to the next level.

If you stop thinking of the US as a 'normal' western country and look back to Latin America in the 70s and 80s Videla, Banzar, Pinochet etc... everything makes a lot more sense.

The seeds were planted a long time ago. This was probably always how the American project was gonna end.