US Presidential Election 2020 Thread II - Judgement Day(s)

Tell me how · 15-12-2020 09:17PM

dogbert27 wrote: »

It's been said on here that Trump often accuses others of what he is guilty of himself.

Because he lost the election nobody is saying to dig in to his votes but for him to win 70 million maybe someone should turn the tables and start investigating voter fraud for Trump votes.

In 2017, the secretary of state in Georgia, one Brian Kemp, oversaw the illegitimate purging of voters from polls in the state to the tune of 700K people. Most from disenfranchised communities.

The 2018 election for Governor in the state of Georgia saw the winner emerge by a margin of about 50K. That winner was Brian Kemp....

Republicans have long had an interest in the legitimacy of the Democratic process but that largely stopped at only being concerned that they be the only ones to benefit from it.

It's not for a microsecond surprising that this was attempted, Bernie Sanders gave a play by play account of how it might go down before we got anywhere near the 3rd of November.

mcmoustache · 15-12-2020 09:42PM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Trump needs to take his tablets along with many of his MAGA supporters with baseball caps and low loader trucks.

Worrying in a way that 70 or so million voted for this moron. Will the frenzy dissipate I wonder.

No. There's a huge segment of the population that's been disinformed by unscrupulous types for decades. Gullibility is a huge problem over there. That crowd will blindly follow the next "cause" that the angry white-grievance media and personalities cook up for them.

They went whole hog for an incompetent shyster like Trump. The next one will be a lot smarter.

Water John · 15-12-2020 09:54PM

When people find that their generation and the next one will be less well off than the previous one, they are open to be preyed upon.

Headshot · 15-12-2020 10:27PM

Anyone know how the George races are going at the moment? Be interesting to know do the Dems have any chance?

pixelburp · 15-12-2020 10:32PM

Headshot wrote: »

Anyone know how the George races are going at the moment? Be interesting to know do the Dems have any chance?

If you check 538, both Democrats are polling ahead of their rivals, albeit not by a huge amount. So whether that'll translate into votes is anyone's guess. Especially given Georgia appears to be a disaster for voter enfranchisement.

listermint · 16-12-2020 07:59AM

Headshot wrote: »

Anyone know how the George races are going at the moment? Be interesting to know do the Dems have any chance?

https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/1338848804553027586

hirondelle · 16-12-2020 08:59AM

Water John wrote: »

When people find that their generation and the next one will be less well off than the previous one, they are open to be preyed upon.

Also, I know it isn't at the forefront of people's minds, but the fact that life expectancy in the US is decreasing is another indicator of things not being right in society. A problem his ex-mate Vlad shares with Trump.

TomOnBoard · 16-12-2020 02:35PM

hirondelle wrote: »

Also, I know it isn't at the forefront of people's minds, but the fact that life expectancy in the US is decreasing is another indicator of things not being right in society. A problem his ex-mate Vlad shares with Trump.

A dreadful indictment of the failure of "The American Dream" to do much other than put its people to sleep permanently ever sooner. In fact, its a Mega-Capitalist's dream: use people, fatten them up on cheap **** masquerading as food, then hook them on 'pain-killers' so they'll die from obesity and opioid overdoses and obviate any need for State-supported health and social care into old age. Life expectancy reached a peak in 2014 and has been on the decline since, without ever considering the effect that Covid will have on the figures.

On the other end, infant mortality is one of the highest among rich/developed countries which must surely make all those right wing 'pro-lifers' very happy. Make sure the woman is forced to carry pregnancies to full term, and then do SFA to help them after birth.

This is a read thats worth a look:

https://ourworldindata.org/us-life-expectancy-low

eire4 · 16-12-2020 09:39PM

mcmoustache wrote: »

No. There's a huge segment of the population that's been disinformed by unscrupulous types for decades. Gullibility is a huge problem over there. That crowd will blindly follow the next "cause" that the angry white-grievance media and personalities cook up for them.

They went whole hog for an incompetent shyster like Trump. The next one will be a lot smarter.

That is what is scary about what is going on in the US as they lurch further and further to the right as a country. They already at best IMHO are an oligarchy that is leaning towards authoritarianism.

feargale · 17-12-2020 12:18AM

A question for all of you:
Suppose Trump were found guilty of serious crimes and his defence pleaded insanity - would you accept the plea?

amandstu · 17-12-2020 02:13AM

feargale wrote: »

A question for all of you:
Suppose Trump were found guilty of serious crimes and his defence pleaded insanity - would you accept the plea?

Isn't the consensus that he has a severe character disorder?

That is not insane .He is aware of his actions but his priority is himself .

Whether his apparent inability to measure his words and actions against the (as close as possible) objective truth is actually insane is more debatable, but I would say "bad not mad" most accurately describes him and if there is any worthwhile sanction going around (ie should he be made an example when there are so few in his mould?) he should be first in line.

Seems selfish but public entertainment value might be favourized when choosing how to deal with him post election.

I suspect he will have been defanged in very short order thereafter and will be fit for his true vocation of public amuser.

(Maybe he will slip into true madness for our benefit )

moon2 · 17-12-2020 02:13AM

feargale wrote: »

A question for all of you:
Suppose Trump were found guilty of serious crimes and his defence pleaded insanity - would you accept the plea?

If he were found to be legally and medically insane, and placed with appropriate treatment, then sure!

I can't imagine a world where that would happen though, so I'm not sure what we're going to learn from the question

robinph · 17-12-2020 02:18AM

feargale wrote: »

A question for all of you:
Suppose Trump were found guilty of serious crimes and his defence pleaded insanity - would you accept the plea?

Surely they would need someone to make that assessment of him at the time, and that would then mean that medical professional, and all the ones around him now, would then be up on charges for not having removed him from office when it mattered. As Trump wouldn't have the power to pardon any of them it would be a risky move by anyone in a position to make that assessment.

TomOnBoard · 17-12-2020 02:40AM

feargale wrote: »

A question for all of you:
Suppose Trump were found guilty of serious crimes and his defence pleaded insanity - would you accept the plea?

I'm afraid that I reject your premise: You have framed the question as a plea AFTER having been found guilty of the crimes. If the insanity defense were to have any effect, it would need to have been argued and proven as valid to a Court's satisfaction such that the verdict would result in a NG by reason of insanity or similar. If you're found guilty, then by definition any earlier insanity defense has been rejected.

Tell me how · 17-12-2020 04:12AM

feargale wrote: »

A question for all of you:
Suppose Trump were found guilty of serious crimes and his defence pleaded insanity - would you accept the plea?

Absolutely not. He also said he was a very stable genius and that he passed a cognitive test.

He's a narcissist and while that might be a mental condition, it doesn't nor shouldn't absolve him from his actions.

duploelabs · 17-12-2020 09:08AM

feargale wrote: »

A question for all of you:
Suppose Trump were found guilty of serious crimes and his defence pleaded insanity - would you accept the plea?

Accredited by which exactly doctor, bearing in mind his loose familiarity with the truth. Especially when it comes medical reports

Igotadose · 17-12-2020 09:17AM

duploelabs wrote: »

Accredited by which exactly doctor, bearing in mind his loose familiarity with the truth. Especially when it comes medical reports

And it depends which court; the rules on pleading insanity are a mish-mash, some courts don't accept it for many defenses.

seamus · 17-12-2020 09:35AM

feargale wrote: »

A question for all of you:
Suppose Trump were found guilty of serious crimes and his defence pleaded insanity - would you accept the plea?

Only if independent and qualified medical professionals assessed him fully and agreed with it.

You don't just get to plead insanity because you feel like it.

It's also not consequence-free. It's basically a plea that "yes, I did these things but I'm not capable of consent or understanding". That typically leads to the individual being held without their consent, and will also allow family members and creditors to start proceedings to take control of their estate on the basis that he's incapable of managing his own affairs.

Not only would such a plea end up with Trump under house arrest, he would also find himself shoved into a medium-luxury mental facility somewhere without access to Twitter and unable to hold rallies or media interviews while his "doting" children take control of his empire and his creditors collect on their debts.

Igotadose · 17-12-2020 09:53AM

seamus wrote: »

Only if independent and qualified medical professionals assessed him fully and agreed with it.

You don't just get to plead insanity because you feel like it.

It's also not consequence-free. It's basically a plea that "yes, I did these things but I'm not capable of consent or understanding". That typically leads to the individual being held without their consent, and will also allow family members and creditors to start proceedings to take control of their estate on the basis that he's incapable of managing his own affairs.

Not only would such a plea end up with Trump under house arrest, he would also find himself shoved into a medium-luxury mental facility somewhere without access to Twitter and unable to hold rallies or media interviews while his "doting" children take control of his empire and his creditors collect on their debts.

And, really... Trump's not insane. He knows exactly what he's doing. Although he amply shows the symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder he's never been diagnosed as far as the public is aware, and it's not 'illness enough' to be used in a legal defense.

Inquitus · 17-12-2020 12:07PM

Tell me how wrote: »

Barr will never run politically. He has zero charisma and seemed to hate being on camera.

Mitch has about as much Charisma as a month dead dog at the side of the road but it doesn't seem to have hampered his chances!

MJohnston · 17-12-2020 01:31PM

Inquitus wrote: »

Mitch has about as much Charisma as a month dead dog at the side of the road but it doesn't seem to have hampered his chances!

Mitch McConnell runs in Kentucky, which has an R+15 lean according to Cook (ironically party registration is D+6 which shows you how inadequate that measure is) so he barely needs any charisma, he just gets re-elected because he's a Republican incumbent. He actually underperformed Trump in Kentucky this year.

Nody · 17-12-2020 03:40PM

Remember the story making the rounds about Trump's twitter account password being hacked? Well it was true... He used MAGA2020! as the password...

amandstu · 17-12-2020 04:06PM

Nody wrote: »

Remember the story making the rounds about Trump's twitter account password being hacked? Well it was true... He used MAGA2020! as the password...

It's BRUSH2021 now

gimli2112 · 17-12-2020 04:54PM

Nody wrote: »

Remember the story making the rounds about Trump's twitter account password being hacked? Well it was true... He used MAGA2020! as the password...

the only thing that surprises me here is that it wasn't PASSWORD

TomOnBoard · 17-12-2020 08:55PM

Nody wrote: »

Remember the story making the rounds about Trump's twitter account password being hacked? Well it was true... He used MAGA2020! as the password...

The same guy also cracked Trump's password 6 years ago.. At that time, it was "yourefired"..

It seems to me he could legitimately re-use that old one now....

Overheal · 18-12-2020 12:27AM

So I've been pointed to this document, and it's very... veryy... veerrryyy prescient.

This is a political science/law (?) article published in 2019. https://lawecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2719&context=luclj

I'm, uh, a few pages in so far, I plan to read the whole thing, which is fascinating so far. The author basically theorycrafted last year, what is actually happening right now with regard to how the 2020 election actually unfolded, how Republicans would behave, and how critical 3 US Code Section 15 can and could still be to the election crisis we find ourselves in.

For example (author uses Elizabeth Warren as a placeholder candidate for this exercize):

Despite protests and counter-protests, and lawsuits and counterlawsuits—each side accusing the other of attempting to steal an election
that is rightfully theirs—Pennsylvania’s election officials certify the
result as a miniscule [theoretical in this case] 2,500-vote victory for [Biden], based on the strength
of the “overtime” votes counted during the canvassing process. This
official certification, of course, is not technically that [Biden] has
won Pennsylvania’s electoral votes, but rather than the slate of
presidential electors pledged to [Biden] have won, based on the popular
vote, the right to serve as the state’s electors. Pennsylvania’s governor so
certifies pursuant to state law.15 Also, as required by Congress, the
governor sends this “certificate of ascertainment” to the National
Archives, thereby notifying the federal government who has been
officially appointed the state’s electors.16 These electors then meet on the
day appointed by Congress (Monday, December 14) and indeed cast their
20 electoral votes for Warren. These electors then dutifully transmit a
certificate of their votes to “the President of the Senate,” as well as
sending a copy to the National Archives, both submissions as specified
by Congress.17

But this is not all that happens in Pennsylvania during this time. At
Trump’s urging, the state’s legislature—where Republicans have
majorities in both houses—purports to exercise its authority under Article
II of the Constitution to appoint the state’s presidential electors directly.
Taking their cue from Trump, both legislative chambers claim that the
certified popular vote cannot be trusted because of the blue shift that
occurred in overtime. Therefore, the two chambers claim to have the
constitutional right to supersede the popular vote and assert direct
authority to appoint the state’s presidential electors, so that this
appointment is in line with the popular vote tally as it existed on Election
Night, which Trump continues to claim is the “true” outcome. The state’s
Democratic governor refuses to assent to this assertion of authority by the
state’s legislature, but the legislature’s two chambers proclaim that the
governor’s assent is unnecessary. They cite early historical practices in
which state legislatures appointed presidential electors without any
involvement of the state’s governor.
18 They argue that like constitutional
amendments, and unlike ordinary legislation, the appointment of
presidential electors when undertaken directly by a state legislature is not
subject to a gubernatorial veto.19*

*19. One could consider the possibility that Pennsylvania’s governor, or judiciary, might attempt
to prevent the two chambers of the state’s legislature meeting for this purpose. For this analysis, I
shall assume that any such attempt would either not occur or not be successful. At the extreme, the
Republican members of the state legislature would likely be able to find a place to assemble, even
if it were not the official statehouse even if their meeting otherwise lacked the appearance of an
official session of the state’s legislative chambers. Even so, these Republican members of the state
legislature could purport to be engaged in an official legislative session, even if meeting in unusual
circumstances, and thus could purport to be appointing the state’s presidential electors pursuant to
the state legislature’s constitutional authority to do so. The Trump-pledged Republican electors
then could assert that they were meeting pursuant to this purported legislative appointment.
(Moreover, even if these irregular legislative sessions never occurred, the Trump-pledged
Republican electors might themselves meet, saying that they would have been appointed by the
state’s legislature if the legislature had not unlawfully been denied the opportunity to assemble, and
thus their electoral votes should be considered by Congress as valid as if the legislature has
successfully met to appoint them.)

The wrinkle here at the moment still is though, unless I am mistaken and I am open to correction, unlike in this prediction no state legislature has actually met as a 2 chamber majority opinion to legitimize any alternate voters. So when it does come down to the Congress, VP is only going to have one lawfully recognizable envelope per state to read from.

paul71 · 18-12-2020 12:49AM

TomOnBoard wrote: »

The same guy also cracked Trump's password 6 years ago.. At that time, it was "yourefired"..

It seems to me he could legitimately re-use that old one now....

I knew about that and the only thing I found surprising was that he did not use "yourfired".

TomOnBoard · 18-12-2020 11:30PM

There was an article/twitter thread by Alison Greene posted here a week or more ago which suggested that many of the vote manipulation allegations that have been made by the Trump campaign are based on projection of what they know Republicans themselves have done in elections. Specifically, Greene points to 'unexplained' anomalies in some predominantly Democrat-registered Kentucky counties that voted for Mc Connell over Mc Grath. The post was quite quickly dismissed on here, as an un-necessary 'conspiracy theory' that was being put out there and that was no more likely to be true than were all the baseless Trump- favouring theories which have failed in Courts all across the country.

Well, Greene has now teamed up with David Cay Johnson's DC Report and they seem to have taken this on. I will be following this closely as, if Mc Connell's victory in KY was influenced by shenannigans, it ought to be capable of being outed.

https://twitter.com/GrassrootsSpeak/status/1340048016229724160?s=19

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/12/why-the-numbers-behind-mitch-mcconnells-re-election-dont-add-up/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Christy42 · 19-12-2020 12:28AM

Like with Trump's random cases I would go want proof before deciding this is a story.

TomOnBoard · 19-12-2020 12:42AM

Christy42 wrote: »

Like with Trump's random cases I would go want proof before deciding this is a story.

I'd say its already a story. Whether there's truth in the story is the question. For me, the fact that Greene got DC Report to publish it is interesting. No doubt, it requires much further analysis, but there's enough there for me to warrant that further analysis and investigation by the media.

US Presidential Election 2020 Thread II - Judgement Day(s)

Comments