US Presidential Election 2020

TomOnBoard · 24-09-2020 1:56pm

The current Trump-inspired madness around post-election coups is almost as though he is trying to deflect media attention away from the fact that over 200,000 people have died from an appallingly managed Covid-19 response while he has been in charge.

I trust that, in coming days, Biden maintains focus on this appalling aspect of Trump's gross negligence, and keeps those deaths front and centre in his holding of Trump's feet to the fire. Keep the electorate fully informed, Joe and try to have the vast majority of good people in America come together and remove this pathetic, would-be dictator and his entire rot-inducing cabal from power.

AbusesToilets · 24-09-2020 2:27pm

If nothing else would assuage fears, no Washington lawyer or politician is going to jeopardize their comfortable life for Trump. You think any of these people want to collapse the Republic for Trump? Talk of a Civil War is hysterical nonsense.

Tell me how · 24-09-2020 2:33pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

If nothing else would assuage fears, no Washington lawyer or politician is going to jeopardize their comfortable life for Trump. You think any of these people want to collapse the Republic for Trump? Talk of a Civil War is hysterical nonsense.

You might want to have a look at a history book to see just how many conflicts originated out of fairly benign differences in opinions.

The path America is on is towards a serious armed conflict, either within, or externally. Its focus on funding the military machine and the 'arguments' for having to do so have to be 'strengthened' every decade or so.

And the division within it is more pronounced then it has been at any point in my life time.

everlast75 · 24-09-2020 2:38pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Talk of a Civil War is hysterical nonsense.

"Even God couldn't sink this ship"

Captain Edward John Smith, the Titanic

Quin_Dub · 24-09-2020 2:45pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

If nothing else would assuage fears, no Washington lawyer or politician is going to jeopardize their comfortable life for Trump. You think any of these people want to collapse the Republic for Trump? Talk of a Civil War is hysterical nonsense.

Tell me how wrote: »

You might want to have a look at a history book to see just how many conflicts originated out of fairly benign differences in opinions.

The path America is on is towards a serious armed conflict, either within, or externally. Its focus on funding the military machine and the 'arguments' for having to do so have to be 'strengthened' every decade or so.

And the division within it is more pronounced then it has been at any point in my life time.

Take the video clip going around earlier of the guys wandering the streets yesterday after the Breonna Taylor verdict wearing full body armour and armed to the teeth.

Fast forward to a week or so after the Election and following Trump taking an early lead , the postal votes have now moved Biden into a clear lead. Trump is rage tweeting endlessly about FRAUD!!,THEFT!!, COUP!! and TREASON!! aided and abetted by massive volumes of crap across social-media (the Russians would be in hog heaven!).

Bear in mind there could be a half a dozen states with contested results or even just ones with a big shift in the results over the course of a few days after Election night.

Are those guys sitting at home patiently waiting for an official result or are they more likely to be staging "Brooks Brothers Riots" in combat gear outside count centres?

Then a few equally f**k-witted types on the left decide to "Protect the count" . It kicks off , then Chad Wolf sends in his guys , who only go after one side and the spiral begins.

Is that so wildly far fetched as to be utterly beyond the bounds of possibility?

Devastatingly, it really and truly isn't.

Manic Moran · 24-09-2020 3:46pm

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

I don't see how.

I looked up the situations in Michigan and Florida, since they were just mentioned in the thread. Both have the method for appointment of electors written in law. For example, with Michigan, the GOP controlled house/senate doesn't get a look-in. The people go to the polls. They vote for their preferred suite of electors. The Governor certifies the selection of the electors. That's it.
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(i1ghujeqqj1yo4rip3ulixme))/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-116-1954-IV.pdf

Florida is the same. A vote in the election is specifically a vote for the group of electors supporting the candidate whose name they select. The Sec State is given no discretion, and is obligated to certify as the State's electors the group which obtained the largest number of votes.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0100-0199/0103/Sections/0103.011.html
I mean, I guess Sec State could blatantly break the law, but I'll rate that as unlikely.

A lot of this commentary is fearmongering and detached from any researched reality. My guess? There will be the usual legal shenanigans until election day (the voting of the electors). At that point, the states will appoint the electors according to whichever side had the most votes at that point, 99% of them will vote in accordance with their nominee, and that will be the end of it.

droidus · 24-09-2020 4:01pm

Of course, there's absolutely no chance of anyone blatantly breaking the law, especially on behalf of a president who regularly pardons those who act in his favour.

AbusesToilets · 24-09-2020 4:02pm

Tell me how wrote: »

You might want to have a look at a history book to see just how many conflicts originated out of fairly benign differences in opinions.

The path America is on is towards a serious armed conflict, either within, or externally. Its focus on funding the military machine and the 'arguments' for having to do so have to be 'strengthened' every decade or so.

And the division within it is more pronounced then it has been at any point in my life time.

No it's not, this overwrought hand wringing and gnashing of teeth is a bit pathetic frankly.

everlast75 · 24-09-2020 4:27pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

No it's not, this overwrought hand wringing and gnashing of teeth is a bit pathetic frankly.

Are you telling me that in 2016, you were told all of the things that he has done to date, that you would have believed that they would have happened and that he was still standing, running for re-election and in with a good chance of winning in 2020?

I don't think that for one moment. You are the proverbial frog in the pan.

Keep underestimating what he is prepared to do. Keep placing an over-reliance on the "checks and balances". See what happens.

Manic Moran · 24-09-2020 4:27pm

droidus wrote: »

Of course, there's absolutely no chance of anyone blatantly breaking the law, especially on behalf of a president who regularly pardons those who act in his favour.

He would not be able to pardon a state representative, it wouldn't be a federal crime.

The argument works the other way. What if Biden wins the popular vote but Michigan goes red, and the Governor of Michigan decides that instead of certifying Republican electors, she'll certify the Democrats instead?

The premise of any system of government is based on the theory that people will obey the law. Panicking over what could happen in a very unlikely case of if someone breaks it is basically an advocation for abandoning the rule of law as a basis of operation.

You're letting hypotheticals run away with you. Is there any evidence, any evidence at all, any statements, any leaked secret policy papers, that any State representative or administrator is going to ignore the official final tally and appoint electors from the other side? Bizarrely, the only party I have seen advocate for this have been Democrats, in the Insterstate Electoral College Compact.

droidus · 24-09-2020 4:31pm

OK, so we have a president who has openly proclaimed his contempt for the press and the rule of law. Engages in criminal activities regularly using the presidency and political partisanship as a shield against prosecution. Has repeatedly colluded with foreign governments to gain electoral advantages. Has encouraged his supporters towards political violence. Has openly engaged in voter suppression and election rigging and is now baldly stating that he wants a continuation of his regime regardless of the result.

But its hysterical to suggest that he wont use every means at his disposal to stay in power?

droidus · 24-09-2020 4:35pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

The premise of any system of government is based on the theory that people will obey the law. Panicking over what could happen in a very unlikely case of if someone breaks it is basically an advocation for abandoning the rule of law as a basis of operation.

Well yes. The GOP is an anti-majoritarian organisation. The idea that they would steal the election outright is not an outrageous one, it would be the logical conclusion and the final step of at least two decades of official policies.

AbusesToilets · 24-09-2020 4:37pm

droidus wrote: »

OK, so we have a president who has openly proclaimed his contempt for the press and the rule of law. Engages in criminal activities regularly using the presidency and political partisanship as a shield against prosecution. Has repeatedly colluded with foreign governments to gain electoral advantages. Has encouraged his supporters towards political violence. Has openly engaged in voter suppression and election rigging and is now baldly stating that he wants a continuation of his regime regardless of the result.

But its hysterical to suggest that he wont use every means at his disposal to stay in power?

Yes, it's hysterical to posit that thousands of people around the country would support and enable the destruction of the Republic to allow Trump to stage a coup.

everlast75 · 24-09-2020 4:38pm

droidus wrote: »

OK, so we have a president who has openly proclaimed his contempt for the press and the rule of law. Engages in criminal activities regularly using the presidency and political partisanship as a shield against prosecution. Has repeatedly colluded with foreign governments to gain electoral advantages. Has encouraged his supporters towards political violence. Has openly engaged in voter suppression and election rigging and is now baldly stating that he wants a continuation of his regime regardless of the result.

But its hysterical to suggest that he wont use every means at his disposal to stay in power?

It is the same kind of Susan Collins sentiment that he, when impeached, would learn from it and become a better President.

How is she doing in her re-election campaign, by the way?

eire4 · 24-09-2020 4:39pm

droidus wrote: »

OK, so we have a president who has openly proclaimed his contempt for the press and the rule of law. Engages in criminal activities regularly using the presidency and political partisanship as a shield against prosecution. Has repeatedly colluded with foreign governments to gain electoral advantages. Has encouraged his supporters towards political violence. Has openly engaged in voter suppression and election rigging and is now baldly stating that he wants a continuation of his regime regardless of the result.

But its hysterical to suggest that he wont use every means at his disposal to stay in power?

There is no question based on both the presidents and the Republicans past behaviour over the previous 3 years that he and the party will do whatever it takes to stay in power. Further more after the election the prospects look equally gloomy. If the president wins you can be sure he will go on one heck of a revenge tour against everyone and anything he feels has slighted him. If he does lose he will engage in a scorched earth policy on the way out IMHO.

Manic Moran · 24-09-2020 4:41pm

droidus wrote: »

OK, so we have a president who has openly proclaimed his contempt for the press and the rule of law. Engages in criminal activities regularly using the presidency and political partisanship as a shield against prosecution. Has repeatedly colluded with foreign governments to gain electoral advantages. Has encouraged his supporters towards political violence. Has openly engaged in voter suppression and election rigging and is now baldly stating that he wants a continuation of his regime regardless of the result.

But its hysterical to suggest that he wont use every means at his disposal to stay in power?

I'm sure he will. Who wouldn't?

The hypothetical here, however, goes far beyond that. We're not talking about election legal shenanigans like hanging chads here, where folks are rulemongering their way through the courts. We're talking about third party government officials outright both blatantly ignoring election results and laws in order to attempt to push forward another group of electors.

Despite the shrill cries that it could happen, there is as near as I can tell no precedent or indicator for such an event. I don't think the US has fallen so far from its roots that it is a tangible possibility.

droidus · 24-09-2020 4:43pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Yes, it's hysterical to posit that thousands of people around the country would support and enable the destruction of the Republic to allow Trump to stage a coup.

Thousands of people around the country are already complicit in a multitude of Trump's criminal schemes, and tens of thousands more have happily looked the other way whilst other presidents committed criminal acts, including war crimes.

They will find a way to justify it to themselves and others.

droidus · 24-09-2020 4:46pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

I'm sure he will. Who wouldn't?

The hypothetical here, however, goes far beyond that. We're not talking about election legal shenanigans like hanging chads here, where folks are rulemongering their way through the courts. We're talking about third party government officials outright both blatantly ignoring election results and laws in order to attempt to push forward another group of electors.

Despite the shrill cries that it could happen, there is as near as I can tell no precedent or indicator for such an event. I don't think the US has fallen so far from its roots that it is a tangible possibility.

From the Atlantic article:

The Trump-campaign legal adviser I spoke with told me the push to appoint electors would be framed in terms of protecting the people’s will. Once committed to the position that the overtime count has been rigged, the adviser said, state lawmakers will want to judge for themselves what the voters intended.

“The state legislatures will say, ‘All right, we’ve been given this constitutional power. We don’t think the results of our own state are accurate, so here’s our slate of electors that we think properly reflect the results of our state,’ ” the adviser said. Democrats, he added, have exposed themselves to this stratagem by creating the conditions for a lengthy overtime.

“If you have this notion,” the adviser said, “that ballots can come in for I don’t know how many days—in some states a week, 10 days—then that onslaught of ballots just gets pushed back and pushed back and pushed back. So pick your poison. Is it worse to have electors named by legislators or to have votes received by Election Day?”

In Pennsylvania, three Republican leaders told me they had already discussed the direct appointment of electors among themselves, and one said he had discussed it with Trump’s national campaign.

“I’ve mentioned it to them, and I hope they’re thinking about it too,” Lawrence Tabas, the Pennsylvania Republican Party’s chairman, told me. “I just don’t think this is the right time for me to be discussing those strategies and approaches, but [direct appointment of electors] is one of the options. It is one of the available legal options set forth in the Constitution.”

All Im saying is that this is a distinct possibility, and given the recent history of the GOP, would not be the radical step you seem to think it is.

nthclare · 24-09-2020 4:48pm

The strange thing is that anyone who is in America see a different version of trumps support to the majority of us.

It's like voting for your local TD and the republican politicians are doing a great job over there.

People are sick of the liberals and all the violence from the left and a lot of people who vote are republicans.

I said it the last time he'll win and I was banned from the politics forum because myself and a moderator went at each other over Trump...

It's not because I support Trump, its because I know a lot about the demography of America.
And I listen to people and not the media.

He's like a magician, he's able to play chaos magic... And it works

Google chaos magic

Tell me how · 24-09-2020 4:49pm

nthclare wrote: »

The strange thing is that anyone who is in America see a different version of trumps support to the majority of us.

It's like voting for your local TD and the republican politicians are doing a great job over there.

People are sick of the liberals and all the violence from the left and a lot of people who vote are republicans.

I said it the last time he'll win and I was banned from the politics forum because myself and a moderator went at each other over Trump...

It's not because I support Trump, its because I know a lot about the demography of America.
And I listen to people and not the media.

He's like a magician, he's able to play chaos magic... And it works

Google chaos magic

I'm living in America and disagree with the above.

everlast75 · 24-09-2020 4:51pm

JFC.

Mueller found that he welcomed the "assistance of and benefited from a foreign power in being elected".

The right reaction would be scandal, an apology and more contrite behaviour.

Right? Right.

Remind me.... WTF did 45 do, I believe, the very next day?

He pressured the President of the Ukraine (a foreign power) to assist him in being elected - AGAIN.

Which lead to him being impeached.

What would be the right reaction to this then, his second time. Definitely , an apology and more contrite behaviour? Yes?

Nope. He asked China to intervene. He continues with the behaviour that got him impeached.

Do people get what kind of person he is? After 4 years, do they still not get it?

All of his life he has had zero consequences and was surrounded by enablers. He hasn't learned - ever!

Now, if you believe that he is a lunatic and will "try" these extreme measures, sorry - even more extreme measures, but you believe he won't be able to get away with it because of others or the checks and balances, show me where he has been curtailed by those to date? This reliance is significant, so show me examples where he has been significantly curtailed.

I'll wait.

droidus · 24-09-2020 4:53pm

Tell me how wrote: »

I'm living in America and disagree with the above.

Yeah, I have a lot of friends in the states who would also disagree, to put it mildly.

seamus · 24-09-2020 5:07pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

Despite the shrill cries that it could happen, there is as near as I can tell no precedent or indicator for such an event. I don't think the US has fallen so far from its roots that it is a tangible possibility.

Read my post above.

So many things have happened during Trump's presidency that have been without precedent, nor was there any indicator in 2016 that such things could happen.

At this stage, anything is a tangible possibility, including a coup.

There's no excuse any more for claiming that the US legal or political system is too robust for it. We know from the past four years, that it's a complete shambles with no ability to resist corruption or malice. In fact, the more corrupt and malicious you are, the more you are rewarded by the legal and political systems.

The US had fallen from its roots probably before you were even born. It just took the right balance of corporatism and narcissicism to properly exploit it.

Tell me how · 24-09-2020 5:14pm

droidus wrote: »

Yeah, I have a lot of friends in the states who would also disagree, to put it mildly.

Forgive me if I take my own experience above the words of friends of an internet source.

droidus · 24-09-2020 5:37pm

Tell me how wrote: »

Forgive me if I take my own experience above the words of friends of an internet source.

lol, right back atcha!

everlast75 · 24-09-2020 5:51pm

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.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1309171857774477314?s=20

Classic Trump.

1) He gets his supporters to parrot his talking point.

2) They do so.

3) He cuts the legs from under them.

Timberrrrrrrr · 24-09-2020 6:05pm

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1309171857774477314?s=20

Classic Trump.

1) He gets his supporters to parrot his talking point.

2) They do so.

3) He cuts the legs from under them.

And to add to that he has openly suggested using mail in voting to vote twice.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/09/05/politics/trump-vote-twice-north-carolina/index.html

Ignoring warnings from election officials, Trump again suggests supporters should try to vote twice

Manic Moran · 24-09-2020 6:17pm

droidus wrote: »

From the Atlantic article:

All Im saying is that this is a distinct possibility, and given the recent history of the GOP, would not be the radical step you seem to think it is.

Again, I don't see how it's possible, regardless of what the Federal Constitution says. In the case of Pennsylvania, again, the legislature doesn't get involved.

https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/US/PDF/1937/0/0320..PDF

It's a little more complicated to read, but the fundamentals are still the same. Voters (referred to as 'electors' in the legislation) vote for Presidential electors. The counties forward the results to the Secretary of the Commonwealth, who directly gives them to the Governor (A Democrat, in this case), who is given no discretion under the law as to whom to issue the certificates of election. The legislature is not involved in the process.

Just how is the GOP supposed to replace the electors in this example?

droidus · 24-09-2020 6:27pm

I dunno, but if it's impossible, then why are Republican leaders in PA contemplating it?

TomOnBoard · 24-09-2020 7:10pm

I believe that Trump and his cabal will do ANYTHING they can think of to de-legitimise any result that does not clearly hand him the Presidency. MILLIONS of his supporters will do WHATEVER it takes to promote and support all such attempts by him.

Some people seem to believe that there is NO possibility that he would succeed. I think its pretty obvious by now, that Trump does not do well when he relies on the Courts to further his various corrupt agendas. I hope that record will continue, but I fear that it may not.

What is clear to me is that many people, well informed and with great expertise in the fields of law and politics, have raised legitimate concerns about how the post-election scenario might play out. I find the arguments as to the possibility of those scenarios playing out (and even worse ones we havent thought of) persuasive, and certainly not unduly hyperbolic. Others are entitled to their opinion as to the potential of those scenarios to happen, and some clearly see them as unlikely if not actually impossible.

All these scenarios seem to be based on a close election day result, with significant Biden gains in the 'overtime' counts. A resounding election result, one way or the other will go a long way towards ensuring wide acceptance of the process and limit the need for a long drawn-out legal battle.

Joe Biden's team need to make that clear, particularly to voters who may be considering abstaining.

US Presidential Election 2020

Comments