US Presidential Election 2020

pixelburp

stefanovich wrote: »

You can disagree with the rules but still play by them. I would imagine he is being pragmatic.

Undermining the democratic process and the attempt to repeat 2000 on a grander scale is not pragmatism but a conscientious attempt to stunt democracy and a fair election. Trump is heading a narrative of postal votes as corrupt to potentially lay groundwork for legal cases.Post votes means the count WILL be slower, thus easier to manipulate and slow in the courts. Doesn't matter if it's trump, O'Connell, Stone or Bush it's corrupting the election process and glib to sniff as "pragmatism" as euphemistic dismissal of a clear attempt to use "the game" to steal an election

stefanovich

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Was he being "pragmatic" when he literally told people to vote twice which is pretty much the definition of voter fraud?

Haven't heard about that. Are you sure it wasn't a joke? Any detail of this from a reputable source (not sure any exist these days)

stefanovich

pixelburp wrote: »

Undermining the democratic process and the attempt to repeat 2000 on a grander scale is not pragmatism but a conscientious attempt to stunt democracy and a fair election. Trump is heading a narrative of postal votes as corrupt to potentially lay groundwork for legal cases.Post votes means the count WILL be slower, thus easier to manipulate and slow in the courts. Doesn't matter if it's trump, O'Connell, Stone or Bush it's corrupting the election process and glib to sniff as "pragmatism" as euphemistic dismissal of a clear attempt to use "the game" to steal an election

The irrational hatred of Trump goes so deep among some they would not think twice about mass destruction of Trump ballots or harvesting of ballots in Biden's favour.

duploelabs

stefanovich wrote: »

The irrational hatred of Trump goes so deep among some they would not think twice about mass destruction of Trump ballots or harvesting of ballots in Biden's favour.

Has this ever happened before given how long mail-in ballots have been utilised?

seamus

Anyone still on the "stop being so hysterical" train; look at the videos out of Louisville yesterday.

What can only be described as a paramilitary platoon marching through the streets - with the support/approval of the local PD - in an act of intimidation, a show of strength.

These are civilians carrying battlefield weapons in the streets of their own country, wearing battlefield clothing, better equipped than some countries's official military. And they're doing it as a political warning.

This is not at all a normal thing for any country. All it takes is one of these terrorist groups to open fire on members of the public and it will ignite a cascade of similar incidents across the entire country. You just need one big event to provoke such an act. Like their cult leader losing an election...

The US is weeks away from an actual civil war. This is not hysteria or hyperbole. All the elements are there, ready to go. It just requires one thing to push it over the edge.

briany

seamus wrote: »

The US is weeks away from an actual civil war. This is not hysteria or hyperbole. All the elements are there, ready to go. It just requires one thing to push it over the edge.

I don't know about an actual civil war, but I suppose it depends on how you define it. I could certainly see many pockets of low-intensity conflict popping up, but then again we're already seeing low-intensity conflict during all the protests, which means there's an argument that the U.S. is already undergoing civil war.

But as for a larger civil war, that's hard to see. I couldn't see much cohesion on a national level, for example. It wouldn't be like the 1860s where it was 'the south' under Davis and Lee. You'd have your hardened militia men, obviously, but you'd also have your Proud Boys daytrippers playing the hard man, but who'd probably p*ss their pants the minute they were fired upon by an attack helicopter.

So continuing unrest, absolutely, but I believe the vast majority of Americans will be content to eat takeout, watch Netflix and do their political battling on Twitter.

Zubeneschamali

looksee wrote: »

He has been dismantling democracy for the past year, specifically and bare-facedly in his comments about voting and ballots.

Dismantling democracy and talking sh!te are two different things.

Trump has been talking sh!te, like delaying the election, getting 3 terms, fraud affecting ballots, and on and on.

He has not actually dismantled anything, because he is utterly ineffective at actually getting things done, since he is almost unbelievably stupid and lazy.

stefanovich

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Dismantling democracy and talking sh!te are two different things.

Trump has been talking sh!te, like delaying the election, getting 3 terms, fraud affecting ballots, and on and on.

He has not actually dismantled anything, because he is utterly ineffective at actually getting things done, since he is almost unbelievably stupid and lazy.

He has gotten a lot done. What are you on about?

pixelburp

stefanovich wrote: »

The irrational hatred of Trump goes so deep among some they would not think twice about mass destruction of Trump ballots or harvesting of ballots in Biden's favour.

Burden of proof is on you to show there's any hint of something like that. Postal vote undermining however is demonstrable within the public domain. So respectfully, less of the conspiracy theorising on your part. Pretty irrational in of itself TBH

duploelabs

stefanovich wrote: »

He has gotten a lot done. What are you on about?

Has he?

-lock HC up
-repeal and replace obamacare
-open up the libel laws

they're three unfulfilled campaign promises I can recall that are left not done

stefanovich

stefanovich wrote: »

He has gotten a lot done. What are you on about?

Gonna need details, he promised for example better healthcare, what has he done? He tried to get rid of ACA which would have reduced access. Most of his presidency has been misuse of executive orders, deregulation and tweeting. His biggest challenge, the coronavirus, he royally messed up with.

stefanovich

pixelburp wrote: »

Burden of proof is on you to show there's any hint of something like that. Postal vote undermining however is demonstrable within the public domain. So respectfully, less of the conspiracy theorising on your part. Pretty irrational in of itself TBH

I don't just pull this stuff out of the air. We have crazies attacking the police and trying to raid the white house.

https://nypost.com/2020/08/29/political-insider-explains-voter-fraud-with-mail-in-ballots/

stefanovich

Deleted User wrote: »

Gonna need details, he promised for example better healthcare, what has he done? He tried to get rid of ACA which would have reduced access. Most of his presidency has been misuse of executive orders, deregulation and tweeting. His biggest challenge, the coronavirus, he royally messed up with.

ISIS, jobs and economy, Israel's relations with its neighbours, supported americans with pandemic checks, took on China, reduced taxes. Lots of stuff

duploelabs

stefanovich wrote: »

ISIS, jobs and economy, Israel's relations with its neighbours, supported americans with pandemic checks, took on China, reduced taxes. Lots of stuff

Devil's in the detail and a lot of that stuff could be argued that Trump did nothing for to get them over the line or just virtue signalled (like china) but actually hurt americans or just woefully insufficient to the actual needs (like th pandemic cheques)

Timberrrrrrrr

stefanovich wrote: »

Haven't heard about that. Are you sure it wasn't a joke? Any detail of this from a reputable source (not sure any exist these days)

Is his own mouth a reputable source?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpeg-ABB-58

seamus

briany wrote: »

But as for a larger civil war, that's hard to see. I couldn't see much cohesion on a national level, for example. It wouldn't be like the 1860s where it was 'the south' under Davis and Lee. You'd have your hardened militia men, obviously, but you'd also have your Proud Boys daytrippers playing the hard man, but who'd probably p*ss their pants the minute they were fired upon by an attack helicopter.

I guess part of the difference is that the attack helicopter could be on the side of the Proud Boys.

Either way, civil wars do take many different forms. And in a country the size of the US it would be possible for there to be several hundred separate skirmishes taking place while the vast majority of Americans still just watch Netflix and eat food and notice no difference day-to-day.

I don't think it's misleading to call it a civil war though just because the place isn't in ruins.

As you say, arguably one could say it's already started with BLM protests and things like people declaring (short lived) autonomous zones in cities.

But you probably can't really say a civil war has started until you have two or more factions - identifiable organisations actively taking part in violence.

Quin_Dub

stefanovich wrote: »

My understanding is that 7 were for trump and 2 were resealed.

You all really don't think there is a problem with mass mailing ballots to every registered voter and allowing them to be mailed back without verification?

Really?

But that isn't what happens at all , not even close.

ALL Mail-in ballots , whether the voter applied for them in the traditional absentee ballot system or whether they got a ballot bulk mailed to them are subject to exactly the same verification process before they are included in any vote count.

The ONLY difference between the two processes is how the ballots are posted out to the voter before they fill it in and send it back.

Everybody still has to have the vote witnessed , everybody still has to supply ID info (Soc Sec number , drivers license etc.) and then they have to sign the ballot.

When the ballot arrives in the count centre they are all treated the same - Names and Addresses are verified , ID info verified , Signatures checked against valid sources (Drivers license of file etc.) and so on.

If any of that stuff fails , the vote gets rejected.

Trumps allegations of "Rampant fraud" for a specific type of mail-in vote are complete and utter rubbish.

All forms of voting carry a very very small risk of fraud - In person included , but the risks are TINY as has been proven time and time again.

Trumps only problem with mail-in voting is that it makes it easier to vote and he knows that more votes means more it's likely he loses it's a simple as that.

everlast75

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Is his own mouth a reputable source?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpeg-ABB-58

It is, when it suits a supporter.

Trump is "joking" when it is not.

stefanovich

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Is his own mouth a reputable source?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpeg-ABB-58

Did you listen or read the transcript?

“So send it in early and then go and vote. And if it's not tabulated, you vote. And the vote is going to count. You can't let them take your vote away. These people are playing dirty politics. Dirty politics,”

He is saying to check that your postal vote was tabulated and if not to vote again in person. Looks like he is looking for evidence of corruption. Not asking people to vote twice.

Quin_Dub

stefanovich wrote: »

Did you listen or read the transcript?


He is saying to check that your postal vote was tabulated and if not to vote again in person. Looks like he is looking for evidence of corruption. Not asking people to vote twice.

But they won't know that on voting day , because they don't process the votes until after the voting is complete.

So yeah - They'll likely end-up committing Voter fraud.

stefanovich

Quin_Dub wrote: »

But that isn't what happens at all , not even close.

ALL Mail-in ballots , whether the voter applied for them in the traditional absentee ballot system or whether they got a ballot bulk mailed to them are subject to exactly the same verification process before they are included in any vote count.

The ONLY difference between the two processes is how the ballots are posted out to the voter before they fill it in and send it back.

Everybody still has to have the vote witnessed , everybody still has to supply ID info (Soc Sec number , drivers license etc.) and then they have to sign the ballot.

When the ballot arrives in the count centre they are all treated the same - Names and Addresses are verified , ID info verified , Signatures checked against valid sources (Drivers license of file etc.) and so on.

If any of that stuff fails , the vote gets rejected.

Trumps allegations of "Rampant fraud" for a specific type of mail-in vote are complete and utter rubbish.

All forms of voting carry a very very small risk of fraud - In person included , but the risks are TINY as has been proven time and time again.

Trumps only problem with mail-in voting is that it makes it easier to vote and he knows that more votes means more it's likely he loses it's a simple as that.

There is no signature or security on the ballot itself. The envelope and slip are more secure but if you read the article I posted above a technique used was to open the envelope and replace the ballot with a forgery.

Timberrrrrrrr

stefanovich wrote: »

Did you listen or read the transcript?


He is saying to check that your postal vote was tabulated and if not to vote again in person. Looks like he is looking for evidence of corruption. Not asking people to vote twice.

Its voting fraud, there is no either/or you only vote once yet heres Trump saying to his voters to vote twice.

You can try spin this anyway you want but he is openly advocating voter fraud.

stefanovich

Quin_Dub wrote: »

But they won't know that on voting day , because they don't process the votes until after the voting is complete.

So yeah - They'll likely end-up committing Voter fraud.

I see two possible realities.

a) The system is secure and duplicates will be uncovered
b) The system is insecure and open to fraud - proving Trump's point.

Which is it?

stefanovich

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Its voting fraud, there is no either/or you only vote once yet heres Trump saying to his voters to vote twice.

You can try spin this anyway you want but he is openly advocating voter fraud.

Home to vote, you remember that? You remember you all argued for it at the time?

He did say to check if your vote was tabulated and if not to vote again.

droidus

stefanovich wrote: »

1. Powerful and continuing nationalism
America has always been a patriotic country. The left are openly expressing hatred for the US.
2. Disdain for human rights
Any example of this? Enforcing immigration law?
3. Identification of enemies as a unifying cause
Which enemies are you talking about? Violent antifa or ISIS?
4. Rampant sexism
He is about to appoint a female supreme court judge.
5. Controlled mass media
No example of this... Unless you are talking about social media. What he is attempting to do in that space is admirable and in everyone's best interests
6. Obsession with national security
More obsessed than any previous President? Obama? No. He has tried hard to deescalate tensions with historical enemies.
7. Religion and government intertwined
This has always been a part of American politics.
8. Corporate power protected
Most americans are invested in the stock market.
9. Labor power suppressed
Not sure what you mean by this? Are you a marxist?
10. Disdain for intellectual and the arts
Hmm, I think the people smashing up national monuments tick that box
11. Obsession with crime and punishment
The police in democrat run states are literally not enforcing the law. People's businesses and homes are being wrecked.
12. Rampant cronyism and corruption
Any proof? Please take a look at Hunter Biden.

This is clearly insane, but there is some truth beneath the madness.

The US has been a proto-fascist state for a very long time. From its obsession with nationalist indoctrination, fetishisation and valorisation of the military, pursuit of endless war, religious insanity in government, imprisonment and oppression of non-people... the list is endless.

What Trump has done is made explicit some of the worst tendencies of American society and politics and mixed them with his own particular psychopathic brand of racist authoritarianism. It's been said a thousand times that he is the symptom and not the cause and the conditions which enable a Trump (or someone like him) to flourish have been in place for quite some time.

briany

seamus wrote: »

I guess part of the difference is that the attack helicopter could be on the side of the Proud Boys.

Either way, civil wars do take many different forms. And in a country the size of the US it would be possible for there to be several hundred separate skirmishes taking place while the vast majority of Americans still just watch Netflix and eat food and notice no difference day-to-day.

I don't think it's misleading to call it a civil war though just because the place isn't in ruins.

As you say, arguably one could say it's already started with BLM protests and things like people declaring (short lived) autonomous zones in cities.

But you probably can't really say a civil war has started until you have two or more factions - identifiable organisations actively taking part in violence.

The only way I'd say any two-bit militia outfit get an attack helicopter would be if one of them were a sympathetic member of the military who stole it off the base. Otherwise, using bitcoin to smuggle one in presents a serious logistical challenge.

If someone wants to call an escalation of the current unrest a civil war, then they're free to do so. But without more formal sides taking part it's difficult for me to call it a true civil war. Two sides comprised of loosely allied groups that live on the extreme ends of the political spectrum who have no single leader, aim, or general strategy just sounds more like a recipe for general chaos.

Although that's assuming that this conflict would mainly consist of wingnuts battling one another. If it were mainly wingnuts battling the state apparatuses like police and military, well, you could say that at least one side in the fight would be an identifiable faction. And if that faction had the leash taken off, the main fight would be over pretty damn quickly.

namloc1980

stefanovich wrote: »

Home to vote, you remember that? You remember you all argued for it at the time?

He did say to check if your vote was tabulated and if not to vote again.

But they wouldn't know. So if they show up to vote again they are committing a crime. Trump, by encouraging people to vote twice, also committed a crime - it is a felony in North Carolina to induce others to vote more than once which is where he said that.

Also no idea what you are on about the home to vote stuff.

Timberrrrrrrr

stefanovich wrote: »

I see two possible realities.

a) The system is secure and duplicates will be uncovered
b) The system is insecure and open to fraud - proving Trump's point.

Which is it?

So to prove fraud he encouraged his fan base to commit it? You really think that's sensible?

Carfacemandog

stefanovich wrote: »

Did you listen or read the transcript?


He is saying to check that your postal vote was tabulated and if not to vote again in person. Looks like he is looking for evidence of corruption. Not asking people to vote twice.

Nobody's vote will be tabulated until after the polls close, hence why it is illegal and voter fraud to mail in your ballot and also show up in person to vote.

namloc1980

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So to prove fraud he encouraged his fan base to commit it? You really think that's sensible?

And he'll absolutely throw those people he encouraged to vote twice under the bus given a chance by saying - "Look, those people voted twice, I told you the election was being rigged!"