Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

Options
16026036056076081148

Comments

  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 14,993 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    The Waco siege (along with the earlier Ruby Ridge one ) are two incidents that all the militia types hold up as examples of the "big Bad Government" and proof that they need their guns to "protect themselves from the Feds" etc.

    By holding the rally in Waco during the 30th anniversary of the Davidian siege and then playing that song , he is making a deliberate effort to connect them to him and his "fight" against the deep state blah blah blah.

    He is perfectly happy to unleash these deranged lunatics and doesn't care about the consequences as long as it helps him get away with everything he has done.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,976 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    There are no more people on here defending him.

    None.

    Any previous pro-Trumpers have jumped ship to DeSantis.

    Most of Fox have abandoned him.

    Murdoch and his papers have abandoned him.

    The only people who will vote for him are those that would have or did or see no problem with storming the capitol for him. Regarding those people who actually did incidentally, he refused to pardon them, or pay their legal fees.

    We are down to the cult members, and those that are so removed from politics, they believe the snippets they get on social media about how he wasn't or isn't that bad.



  • Registered Users Posts: 470 ✭✭archermoo


    And yet last I checked he is still polling ahead of other potential GOP candidates for 2024.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,056 ✭✭✭Flaneur OBrien


    Where are you getting this from?

    He is the clear frontrunner for the rep nomination. DeSantis in second is miles behind.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 14,993 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    In the GOP Primary he has about 25-30% of the likely voters absolutely nailed on - These are the hat wearing , flag waving MAGA base.

    The GOP are repeating the errors of the 2016 cycle and look like they are going to have a whole host of opponents , all of whom will split the "Not Trump" vote and hand him victory.

    However in the actual election that MAGA base plus the "GOP no matter who" votes will simply not be enough to win a majority.

    It will appear closer than is really is because of the nonsense that is the electoral College , but thankfully nutters like Kari Lake in Arizona lost in November meaning that there are no hard core election deniers in situ in high office in any of the swing states.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 470 ✭✭archermoo


    I hope you are correct. I remember a lot of people making similar arguments about the 2016 election.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 14,993 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    That was before people actually knew who he was.

    A large chunk of the vote for Trump in 2016 was of the "Give him a go , he couldn't be much worse" type.

    In every election since then , Trump has lost (or lost the GOP seats because of his presence).

    Everyone knows exactly who he is now and absolutely no one that didn't vote for him in 2020 is going to change their minds about him for 2024.



  • Registered Users Posts: 470 ✭✭archermoo


    Again, I hope you're right. In 2016 he got ~63 million votes. In 2020 he got ~74 million. Granted the popular vote doesn't determine the winner, but he gained more than 11 million votes after everyone knew exactly who he was. Fortunately Biden did better with both the popular vote and the EC vote.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 14,993 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    More people voted - A combination of a growing population and the fact that mail-in voting actually made it easier for people to vote.

    He got significantly less of the total vote as a percentage of the total vote.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,976 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Yeah, these guys......


    "We are down to the cult members, and those that are so removed from politics, they believe the snippets they get on social media about how he wasn't or isn't that bad."


    Combine that with how unpopular DeSantis is and that explains the figures.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,008 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    I wonder was the previous DeSantis wave the proverbial mile wide and inch deep. He doesn't strike me as a hugely charismatic guy, and his fumbling around trying to find the 'sweet spot' on Ukraine suggests a guy without a great deal of political conviction. I wonder is there time for the never-Trump Republicans to find another saviour and who that might be...



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭TheRepentent


    and making cameo appearances in the Ukraine thread supporting the Moscow Midget



  • Registered Users Posts: 470 ✭✭archermoo


    In 2016 he got 46.1% of the popular vote. In 2020 he got 46.8%. So a higher percentage. Not by much, but higher.

    On the other hand in 2016 his opponent got 48.2%, meaning neither got a majority of the popular vote. In 2020 his opponent got 51.3%. The big difference is the number of votes that went to third party candidates. 5.7% went in 2016, while only 1.9% did so in 2020.

    So he was further behind his opponent in 2020 both in total votes and percentage of the vote. But both his total and percentage increased in 2020. The only thing that went down was the number of EC votes that he got. And since 2020 a lot of Republican controlled states have been putting in place laws that make it harder for groups that tend to vote more Democratic than Republican. As well as laws that allow for the state government to override the state's popular vote when determining where the state's EC votes go.

    So again, I hope you are right.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,968 ✭✭✭TheIrishGrover


    She didn't use the opportunity to blame "Woke Culture" to allow a trans person near a school? She's slipping. Oh dear. Is she REALLY MAGA?



  • Registered Users Posts: 81,641 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Well, yes.

    I'm surprised to hear she still hasn't learned about Kalief Browder. By contrast insurrectionists still being held in pretrial confinement doesn't faze me.

    She tried to complain that alleged improving of conditions is evidence of mistreating the inmates 🤔



  • Registered Users Posts: 81,641 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Trumps claims of executive privilege have failed and Judge orders Pence to be compelled to testify about conversations he had with POTUS Trump about January 6.

    However it is noted, Pence could still appeal and assert his own privilege as President of the Senate for his own actions on January 6 itself.

    I don't think the Framers really thought out these privilege arguments much, but I guess if 2 or more branches of government are already engaged in illegal collusion you're already fucked in the a as a citizen anyway right? The madness it feels like that Pence might have more Legislative Branch privilege to not testify than Trump has Exectutive Privelege to not testify. However iirc Lindsay Graham already tried to weasel out of testifying (and failed) under the Speech and Debate clause in Article I.

    And to think the last hurdle to anything sticking to Trump is still the court that's been getting packed since Scalia. Given their recent rulings I wouldn't be surprised if the Roberts court came out with "it's not historically traditional to prosecute former presidents, therefore we won't" - yes, the Roberts court cited History and Tradition in Dobbs v Jackson to overturn Roe vs Wade, and in Bruen it recently ruled along the same line of History and Tradition to render null a heap of gun regulations across the country, just last month:

    I might have already mentioned this case earlier in the thread or some other, and if so I'm sorry, actually only heard the report about it this morning and it still blows me away that the United States legal system is going to come apart at the seams soon because these chucklefucks want to enshrine literally "the most dangerous phrase in business" as the reason why we no longer allow the Legislature(s) to Legislate. And they're **** republicans I was told they knew how the **** to Business. And their best reason for defeating abortion and gun rights is, 'well we understand that's the intent of the law that the lawmakers wrote and got signed into law but in our opinion... that's not the way we've always done things, you can't just ... make new laws, that's ridiculous.'



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,610 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    de Santis is way behind in national polls but he is also an undeclared candidate who isnt currently campaigning nationally. But he has been running a shadow campaign masquerading as a book tour in the early voting states. In Iowa (who vote first in February 2024) he has an 8 point lead over Trump and in New Hampshire who vote next they are neck and neck.

    I dont think de Santis can beat Trump but it could be a lot closer than how things look right now as national polls dont really matter, only state ones do. de Santis' main problem though will be the primary debates, Trump can say anything he likes about him, call him a loser and so on but he cant do the same to Trump because he cannot alienate the MAGA base who he needs onside to win the White House. Se he's going to be constantly boxing defensively against Trump, it very hard for him to attack him in any meaningful way.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,976 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Damn the liberal owner of twitter!

    Oh wait...



  • Registered Users Posts: 81,641 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    What's funny is the florida house speaker said “In this case, it’s an honor for someone from Florida to even consider running for President.” Basically suggesting that yeah, it's against the resign to run law, but cmonnnn, its our good old boy! Doing the things! cmaaaaan!

    Ultimately it's like Trump with the Hatch Act violations in office, Ron is skirting the laws of his own state to use the Governorship not to focus on the governing of Florida, but on his presidential shadow campaign as you put it, and using the apparatus of his office to pull off stunts for the national stage like shipping migrants from Texas to Martha's Vineyard and signing laws that will wither in federal court just to steer the electoral narrative.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 18,976 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    His interview was exactly the same as all his previous interviews.

    They were always horrific.

    The only reason he is saying that this one was horrific is because he realises Trump will not win 2024.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,968 ✭✭✭TheIrishGrover


    "He was whining. He was complaining. He was playing the victim card again and again"..... have... Have they not heard him speak in the last 4 years? In the last 6 years? In the last 8 years?

    Notice though: They STILL couch their words: They say this was the worst interview they heard "The President" give.... They complained about his INTERVIEW. Not he himself. So then he rails on them they can crawl back on their bellies "Well lord President, we specifically said the this was the worst interview you gave. We said 'Where is Donald Trump?' ". So they said he was awful in the interview...

    Also, I notice your man said he voted for trump twice. As he voted for trump, does this mean he voted twice for him in the same election? The GOP's only study said the only evidence they saw for multiple votes was republican 😀



  • Registered Users Posts: 33,226 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    No, if he voted for Trump twice I'd take that to mean 2016 and 2020.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,610 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    That Dominion vs Fox News case is coming to the boil nicely at the moment. Dominion want a good few Fox News anchors in the witness box as well as the Murdochs. While they may not get the Murdochs in the box they are likely to get Fox news anchors in it, Hannity and Ingham are their chief targets. We'll definitely be seeing Sidney Powell and Guiliani in the box anyway as they started this stuff about election machines being rigged in Venezuela. Reports say Foxs lawyers have battled tooth and nail against Dominion on every single Fox anchor they want to call so far, it seems Fox are really running scared on this one and are desperate to keep them out of the witness box rather than using them as a defence.

    Dominion claim they have internal messages among Fox staff that proves they knew that Trumps rigged election stuff was a lie but they decided to run with it anyway. Fox are claiming 1st amendment rights and the medias right to report the news so this will go all the way to the Supreme Court eventually. Ultimately Fox are going to claim under the 1st amendment they can say what they like but I dont think knowingly spreading lies about a stolen election is going to pass the shouting 'fire' in a crowded theatre test. Its $1.2bn in compensation that Dominion are seeking so its pretty serious stuff, will be interesting watching how it plays out.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 14,993 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Fox are more concerned about the reputational damage of the case that the actual outcome I suspect.

    The actual monetary damages that Dominion might win will take years to have to be paid and will likely only be a fraction of the headline ask.

    But , if Dominion get Hannity et al on the stand , Dominions lawyers will burn Fox to the ground with their viewers by forcing them all to admit that they make stuff up and deliberately lie to the viewers.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,976 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    "Dominions lawyers will burn Fox to the ground with their viewers by forcing them all to admit that they make stuff up and deliberately lie to the viewers"

    will they though?

    Was it not the case that Fox already admitted on the stand that Carlson is entertainment and not news? It's not that much of a difference from that for those folk



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,968 ✭✭✭TheIrishGrover


    Fox are more concerned about the reputational damage of the case that the actual outcome I suspect.

    I wouldn't think so. Their viewers take them at 100% true. They will not believe ANY evidence against fox and ALL evidence to support fox. Remember the mindset of the people. Why would they disbelieve fox when fox state that their insurrectionist buddies are innocent tourists who were invited in for a guided tour?


    The ONLY way this MAY have an impact is if they they get fox to say: "Yes, we knew this was a lie. We told the lie intentionally because we wanted to get more money from trump supporters................... to support our Mexican LGBTQI+ abortion clinics"



  • Registered Users Posts: 470 ✭✭archermoo


    Carlson and Fox have repeatedly stated in court that his show is entertainment, not news. And that no reasonable person would believe the things that he says on air are actually true. These admissions have not stopped his viewers from believing him even a little.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,968 ✭✭✭TheIrishGrover


    Tourist



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 14,993 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    The "Talent" have never been on the stand and cross examined though.

    They or their producers have submitted statements or sat for depositions before , but never in open court.

    Also - Fox are significantly more vulnerable now then they have been in the past so I think the risk of damage is far higher today than it might have been in the past. The MAGA's already don't trust them so by admitting that they lied about the election , or at least in the MAGA view by "saying" it was lies they will be viewed as having sold Trump out even more .



Advertisement