How Trump Could Steal The Election

[swansont]

15 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Do you seriously believe that? Or simply believe that to be Trump's hope or strategy?

He’s basically stated that he thinks he has a majority of the court in his pocket, and he wanted the cases to go before that court.

[StringJunky]

26 minutes ago, swansont said:

He’s basically stated that he thinks he has a majority of the court in his pocket, and he wanted the cases to go before that court.

Can you envisage any pertinent election cases getting there that might make any difference?

Edited November 21, 2020 by StringJunky

[swansont]

36 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Can you envisage any pertinent election cases getting there that might make any difference?

Not at this point. His rhetoric was mostly centered on stopping the counting of mail-in ballots, which heavily favored Biden.

2 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Nor is there any sign that the Supreme Court would do any more than interpret the Laws and Constitution,

All they would have to do is interpret them in a way that’s favorable to Trump

2 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

and certainly nothing  to the degree he would require,

There’s the rub. It’s not close enough. 

[TimeFlies]

As an American i won't apologize for selfish or unprincipled countrymen. Democracy isn't just a word. I'm betting relatives of many in this Science Forum have paid some price for western democracy. Those who have relatives or even friends who haven't come home from past military service know democracy is not just a word. No matter who might have won the 2020 presidency there would have still been millions of americans working to maintain democracy in a free world. I believe most who visit these fora would agree.....I pray we all can experience  the freedom to pursue happiness and support 'Just' law and order. Black lives matter. All lives have always mattered to me,even Police lives. I believe nothing i have written is really foreign to the ideals of these Science Fora....Probably I should just delete..

[iNow]

1 hour ago, TimeFlies said:

I'm betting relatives of many in this Science Forum have paid some price for western democracy

I’m betting members themselves have, too. 

The rest of your post was mostly a bunch of judgey holier-than-thou buzzword salad that really had nothing whatsoever to do with the actual discussion taking place so I’ll ignore it. 
 

1 hour ago, TimeFlies said:

Probably I should just delete..

Probably

[TimeFlies]

36 minutes ago, iNow said:

I’m betting members themselves have, too. 

The rest of your post was mostly a bunch of judgey holier-than-thou buzzword salad that really had nothing whatsoever to do with the actual discussion taking place so I’ll ignore it. 
 

Probably

Holier than thou, you didn't ignore it... if you did you wouldn't have responded. I have a right to my opinion!....What's holier than thou to you may not be nonsense to everyone. Someone in the discussion had suggested Americans think democracy is just a word. I suppose you agreed with that post..Ahh..but then you can ignore that.

Edited November 22, 2020 by TimeFlies

[J.C.MacSwell]

3 minutes ago, TimeFlies said:

Holier than thou, you didn't ignore it... if you did you wouldn't have responded. I have a right to my opinion!....What's holier than thou to you may not be nonsense to everyone. 

You do and +1. I'm not sure where you're heading with this but nothing you've said so far should be considered controversial. Maybe I'm just naive and iNow knows better.

[iNow]

4 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Maybe I'm just naive and iNow knows better.

Sometimes

[J.C.MacSwell]

Just now, iNow said:

Sometimes

No doubt

[TimeFlies]

17 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

You do and +1. I'm not sure where you're heading with this but nothing you've said so far should be considered controversial. Maybe I'm just naive and iNow knows better.

This topic is running 8 Pages,unfortunately I was responding to a first page post.I suppose my post seems out of context. I responded to iNOW because it is my experience that too many discussion groups online simple enjoy putting down a newby. I don't care how intelligent someone is if you find my opinion is just word salad that you need to ignore have the good manners not to shove it in my face before you ignore it.

Edited November 22, 2020 by TimeFlies

[J.C.MacSwell]

2 minutes ago, TimeFlies said:

This topic is running 8 Pages,unfortunately I was responding to a first page post.I suppose my post seems out of context. I responded to Inow because it is my experience that too many discussion groups online simple enjoy putting down a newby. I don't care how intelligent someone is if you find my opinion is just word salad that you need to ignore have the good manners not to shove it in my face before you ignore it.

They're a pretty good, and very knowledgeable, group here. Hang in there.

7 hours ago, swansont said:

There’s the rub. It’s not close enough. 

Not even remotely, given the evidence he's actually presented. 

Even his wildest claims seem to fall short, considering the gap.

Adam Schiff level of credibility. Fortunately this won't take four years...

Unfortunately now until January 20 may be the most critical phase of the pandemic.

[J.C.MacSwell]

It would be good if Trump would concede the obvious for the sake of America, even if he doesn't owe that to the Democrats.

[MSC]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

It would be good if Trump would concede the obvious for the sake of America, even if he doesn't owe that to the Democrats.

Unfortunately, Trump thinks he is America. He won't concede while his 'America' is potentially going to go to prison when 'America' is no longer president next year.

As for what Trump owes democrats, they had issues with the 2016 election just as Trump has issues with 2020. The Obama led democrats however, did ensure a smooth and peaceful transition to the Trump administration and they never tried to overturn the results in the manner Trump is attempting now, impeachment is not overturning an election either. Trump is not even returning that favour, without a struggle and a flail. 

 

[MSC]

17 hours ago, TimeFlies said:

This topic is running 8 Pages,unfortunately I was responding to a first page post.I suppose my post seems out of context. I responded to iNOW because it is my experience that too many discussion groups online simple enjoy putting down a newby. I don't care how intelligent someone is if you find my opinion is just word salad that you need to ignore have the good manners not to shove it in my face before you ignore it.

Most groups enjoy testing the newbie. Not putting them down. I was the newbie here a few months ago and had similar feelings as yourself then. I took a hiatus and asked the moderators to suspend my account for a month. Which meant I could just be a fly on the wall and observe how people interact and engage on here.

For example; me and INow butted heads and I even told them to "fuck off" at one point. Since being able to observe their responses without any bias of them being directed at me, while I can recognise that me and INow both have conversation styles that can be construed as abrasive to some, I've come to be appreciative of their responses in my own AOE and recognise we aren't nearly as different as I first thought we were. Admittedly aided by another member here who did a good job of helping me reach a different and fairer perspective of the other users here, including INow. 

What do you mean by not shoving it in your face? Shoving what in your face exactly? Disagreement with you? 

I really would not take anything too personally or seriously here, including yourself. I say that as someone who already made the mistake of doing just that. It only leads to stress and it isn't even constructive stress at that.

Keep in mind that what good and bad manners are, tend to vary between cultures. This forum has it's own culture. If someone on here is genuinely being unhelpfully rude to you, the mods will deal with it. If they don't, it's probably because it wasn't rude by this forums standards. 

19 hours ago, TimeFlies said:

As an American i won't apologize for selfish or unprincipled countrymen. Democracy isn't just a word. I'm betting relatives of many in this Science Forum have paid some price for western democracy. Those who have relatives or even friends who haven't come home from past military service know democracy is not just a word. No matter who might have won the 2020 presidency there would have still been millions of americans working to maintain democracy in a free world. I believe most who visit these fora would agree.....I pray we all can experience  the freedom to pursue happiness and support 'Just' law and order. Black lives matter. All lives have always mattered to me,even Police lives. I believe nothing i have written is really foreign to the ideals of these Science Fora....Probably I should just delete..

I think what INow was getting at, is that although it's a nice thing to try and say, it's off topic for this thread somewhat. It also comes across as virtue signalling since you are aware that you are preaching to the choir. 

I wouldn't feel upset about INows criticism as you yourself said you should probably delete it, so you yourself weren't even sure if it was appropriate to this thread. 

You are absolutely allowed to have an opinion and I commend you for being brave enough to voice it. Just save it for the appropriate threads is all. If you want to talk about how this relates to Trump stealing the election, be our guest.

[swansont]

16 hours ago, MSC said:

As for what Trump owes democrats, they had issues with the 2016 election just as Trump has issues with 2020. 

False equivalence. There was evidence of foreign interference in 2016, voter fraud was not widely alleged, and we didn’t see this flurry of baseless lawsuits trying to overturn an election that was much closer - the lawsuits were typically challenging laws that tended to disenfranchise voters, and happened before the election. 

Trump’s main “issue” seems to be that he lost. The cheating is inferred on the premise that it’s the only way he could lose, rather than being based on evidence.
And Trump is so concerned that he’s golfing...again.

[John Cuthber]

Something puzzles me.

Trump barely won the 2016 election and he did it even though he lost the popular vote.
He has had 4 years to sort out any issues he saw with the electoral process, and didn't so I guess he accepts that the results in 2016 were pretty much a reflection of reality.

He won that on essentially a single issue campaign; "Build a wall". He didn't build the wall.

He's the ultimate "You had one job" meme.

Obviously, that's not going to go down well with the people who voted for him.

In the meantime, he also oversaw the unnecessary deaths of more US citizens that the Vietnam and Korean Wars put together.
Overall, 4 years ago he had less than 50% support, but fluked a win.
Since then he has screwed up virtually everything he has tried to do.

Why would anyone think he was now more popular?

[swansont]

You assume he’s a rational adult. I’m sure he doesn’t see things this way.

[MSC]

3 minutes ago, swansont said:

False equivalence. There was evidence of foreign interference in 2016, voter fraud was not widely alleged, and we didn’t see this flurry of baseless lawsuits trying to overturn an election that was much closer - the lawsuits were typically challenging laws that tended to disenfranchise voters, and happened before the election. 

Trump’s main “issue” seems to be that he lost. The cheating is inferred on the premise that it’s the only way he could lose, rather than being based on evidence.

Good point. That being said; if there had been evidence of voter fraud specifically (not foreign interference as that takes place on social media) would Hilary Clinton have went about the legal routes in the same manner as Trump? Probably not, but then since voter fraud was a non-issue in both cases, it doesn't really matter what a reasonable person would do if they justifiably suspected fraud.

As it is, the reaction of MAGA toward the results have been extremely corrosive. Raffensperger, the election chief in Georgia was a Trump support and still purports to be, yet he is now a pariah in the Republican party and the president called him a RINO for certifying the result for Biden. His wife has even received death threats via text. 

I actually feel really bad for him, he's probably one of the few who put duty over personal politics to call the state for Biden. 

I can understand a Republican being suspicious of votes in Democrat run states, it makes no sense to be suspicious of Georgia though. 

A good comparison might be the claim that the moon landing was faked. Raffensperger is doing what Russia did in that Russia, despite having wanted to win the space race themselves, have never once claimed that the Americans faked it. 

The result in Georgia by comparison, ought to have been accepted by Republicans as it was one of the few races where the result could not have been more free of political bias, when even the state appointed election chief there wanted Trump to win and still called the state for Biden. If that isn't a sign of a secure election, I don't know what is.

One thing I have been thinking about recently, why I don't think Trump will be able to overturn the result, even by force. Is that quite frankly the bulk of his supporters lives are just too comfortable, to actually risk it all in the violent takeover that it seems Trump is trying to seek, through political theater. If his base were actually part of an objectively deeply and historically disenfranchised, excluded and abused group, that had little to no prospects in life due to that exclusion, then maybe we'd be seeing more desperate acts en masse to overturn the results of the election. As it is, what seems to be keeping this at bay, is in fact the privilege most of the MAGA crowd claim they don't have. 

8 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Why would anyone think he was now more popular?

This puzzles me too. He won by such narrow margins in 2016 and has spent the last four years not only demonising democrats, but any type of Republican who ever so slightly disagrees with him.

Someone with as tiny a lead as they had, could simply not afford to alienate any of their voters. Especially when it's only a two party system in practice but not theory. I know of a few that voted libertarian because they could not stomach voting for Trump or Biden. The libertarian party was always more likely to win votes from the Republican party than it was the democrats. 

It will be interesting to see how Biden plays the next four years. If he is smart, since he won electoral votes by narrow margins, if he wants a second term he will have to follow through on his Unity talk with efficacy. 

[John Cuthber]

31 minutes ago, MSC said:

If he is smart, since he won electoral votes by narrow margins, if he wants a second term he will have to follow through on his Unity talk with efficacy. 

Well... maybe he should just tell the truth about Republicans.

Or he could point out that Americans really like Socialism.
Socialism built roads.
(Yeah, sure, and schools and libraries and the internet and stuff- but Americans really love cars).
If he spends 4 years explaining that, then the next time the Republican candidate "accuses" someone of Socialism- it won't have so much  effect.

Who knows?

In maybe to or three presidential terms you could end up with a politician who would look "normal" elsewhere in the world, rather than extreme Right wing .

[J.C.MacSwell]

2 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

Well... maybe he should just tell the truth about Republicans.

 

Instead of claiming Mitt Romney would put African Americans back in chains?

 

[swansont]

3 hours ago, MSC said:

Good point. That being said; if there had been evidence of voter fraud specifically (not foreign interference as that takes place on social media) would Hilary Clinton have went about the legal routes in the same manner as Trump? Probably not, but then since voter fraud was a non-issue in both cases, it doesn't really matter what a reasonable person would do if they justifiably suspected fraud.

I don’t know if you could validly flip an election that way. It’s a matter of violating election law, rather than invalidating votes, and in a functioning government you could remove illicitly-elected folks; active solicitation of foreign interference seems like it’s an impeachable offense. But the GOP, as we know, had no interest in convicting for other offenses.

[iNow]

7 hours ago, MSC said:

Most groups enjoy testing the newbie

He was not a noob, but was instead a sockpuppet of a previously banned user. This has since been confirmed and the user banned... again. 
 

6 hours ago, MSC said:

I don't think Trump will be able to overturn the result, even by force. Is that quite frankly the bulk of his supporters lives are just too comfortable, to actually risk it all in the violent takeover that it seems Trump is trying to seek

It’s not about trying to overturn the election result. It’s about trying to upend trust in democracy itself.

You still think this is a chess game where thinking 4 moves ahead is how you win, but the “other” side is busy lighting the chess board itself on fire with a blow torch from underneath while replacing the pieces with cheese puffs. 
 

6 hours ago, MSC said:

will be interesting to see how Biden plays the next four years. If he is smart, since he won electoral votes by narrow margins, if he wants a second term he will have to follow through on his Unity talk with efficacy

Nearly everything he wants to do will be obstructed by the Republican led senate. The senate will also continue blocking covid relief aid so the economy falters and then they can blame Biden for not fixing it.

Biden will be forced to rely on executive orders and they’ll accuse him of being a rule breaking liberal who wants to be a dictator (even though Biden won’t likely use as many EOs as Trump has).

Biden will be blamed for failing to bring the country together despite him being sincere and acting in good faith (unlike those out to whom he’ll be reaching).

It’s basically this same exact playbook they used against Obama, and it worked then, too. This time with QAnon, NewsMax, Parler, and OAN and whatever grift Trump sets up next  it will be like the tea party times 10 on steroids. 

[MigL]

How do you think D Trump's trying to disqualify Georgia votes, and vilification of the whole state, plays out with the voters in January when the two Senate seats come up for election ?
Could his antics sour the voters on Republicans, so that they vote in Democrat Senators ?
IOW, is the Republican party shooting itself in the foot by still backing the Loser ?

[iNow]

41 minutes ago, MigL said:

How do you think D Trump's trying to disqualify Georgia votes, and vilification of the whole state, plays out with the voters in January when the two Senate seats come up for election ?
Could his antics sour the voters on Republicans, so that they vote in Democrat Senators ?
IOW, is the Republican party shooting itself in the foot by still backing the Loser ?

In the long term, yes. Absolutely. There are scores of young people who will NEVER vote Republican because of all of this, and many former republicans who will never vote that way again. This is Trumps party now, and legacy republicans and conservatives hate Trump and those like him coming up through the ranks.   

But in the short term, this is exactly what it takes to drive turnout. These claims of fraud piss people off and it’s the angry people who believe the conspiracies and who follow QAnon who are easiest to control and the most likely to show up in large numbers to vote. 

Overall, I seriously doubt the Democrats have their shit together enough to turn out more voters than the zombies Trump will get to show up. Republicans have created a monster, and they’re doing exactly what it takes to get the monster to arrive in January for the special elections in Georgia.

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ~Voltaire

Edited November 23, 2020 by iNow

[Sriman Dutta]

11 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

Something puzzles me.

Trump barely won the 2016 election and he did it even though he lost the popular vote.
He has had 4 years to sort out any issues he saw with the electoral process, and didn't so I guess he accepts that the results in 2016 were pretty much a reflection of reality.

He won that on essentially a single issue campaign; "Build a wall". He didn't build the wall.

He's the ultimate "You had one job" meme.

Obviously, that's not going to go down well with the people who voted for him.

In the meantime, he also oversaw the unnecessary deaths of more US citizens that the Vietnam and Korean Wars put together.
Overall, 4 years ago he had less than 50% support, but fluked a win.
Since then he has screwed up virtually everything he has tried to do.

Why would anyone think he was now more popular?

Trump is another epitome for the rising trend in aggressive ethno-nationalism in politics. His most popular slogan "Make America Great again" and bullying others, including activists, social workers, leftists, and even non-whites is something that will instantly portray him as a white supremacist. There was a surge in the white supremacist groups and hate groups in US in his regime. He also totally destroyed America's diplomatic relations. He often quotes false statements in press conferences, and many popagandas. He did nothing to help people in the covid pandemic. 

Indeed he was not deserved to be a President.