I am thankful this Presidential election was not close, as in it did not come down to PA. I knew if it did, what Trump is doing now would be even worse and probably have more Republican support.
I also think this is dangerous in the sense that the longer it goes without top level Republicans stating Trump needs to move on, the more people like Quaker, and his supporters, but also some members of the Republican party will see as Trump's claims were at least believable.
posted by ptown_trojans_1No you are not, and you are combining so many different things over the last four years to try and compare it to what the President is doing now.
You simply are mistaking some of the events top try and prove your point. Stating the Russia bullcrap to impeach Trump is wrong as you need to go back and remember it was about the Ukraine call and even the China statement about Biden. But, I'll let your mistake slide for now.
This is what I meant when I said a few weeks ago about living in two different worlds. I live in one where what the President is doing is pretty damn historic, pathetic, and way outside the norm. You are trying to both sides it and come up with your own story to not accept the reality of the situation.
You said one correct thing there.
You are living in your own world.
posted by jmogYou said one correct thing there.
You are living in your own world.
So are you my sad little friend.
posted by ptown_trojans_1So are you my sad little friend.
You two do a great job of hearing each other out with open minds. I always learn something by following the engaging back and forth.
posted by ptown_trojans_1So are you my sad little friend.
I can't help it you are trying to say that Trump using the courts before the final EC votes to contest the election is worse than the dems using 3.5 years of public MSM and HoR/Senate to impeach a POTUS after the EC vote/election.
The only difference between the two are when it happened in the election cycle, how long the party spent doing it, and what avenue (courts vs Senate). Its still the same thing, attacking a duly elected president as illegitimate and trying to remove a duly elected president.
Trump right now is no different than what the dems did for 3.5 years. Both are wrong, but you acting like the dems were better is hilariously biased.
If you can't laugh at the idea of Comrade Sanders as Labor Secretary, then you probably take politics way too seriously.
I've seen lots of blue check "journalists" pushing their ideas/hopes of Hillary being in Biden's administration somewhere, namely as ambassador.
Wouldn't that just be perfect?
posted by ptown_trojans_1I am thankful this Presidential election was not close, as in it did not come down to PA. I knew if it did, what Trump is doing now would be even worse and probably have more Republican support.
I also think this is dangerous in the sense that the longer it goes without top level Republicans stating Trump needs to move on, the more people like Quaker, and his supporters, but also some members of the Republican party will see as Trump's claims were at least believable.
I stick to numbers, reason and logic. To have certain democrat stronghold areas inside swing states go from 55 - 60% historical turnout to 80-90% is a statistical impossibility; not an improbability, an impossibility, without fraud. This is not complicated. The mail-in ballots were the perfect vehicle to deliver the desired result.
posted by QuakerOats
I stick to numbers, reason and logic. To have certain democrat stronghold areas inside swing states go from 55 - 60% historical turnout to 80-90% is a statistical impossibility; not an improbability, an impossibility, without fraud. This is not complicated. The mail-in ballots were the perfect vehicle to deliver the desired result.
Translation: If I keep crying, the Tears Fairy will grant my wish!!!
posted by HereticTranslation: If I keep crying, the Tears Fairy will grant my wish!!!
newsmax and oann told him Trump was cheated. they wouldn't lie to him.
posted by jmogI can't help it you are trying to say that Trump using the courts before the final EC votes to contest the election is worse than the dems using 3.5 years of public MSM and HoR/Senate to impeach a POTUS after the EC vote/election.
The only difference between the two are when it happened in the election cycle, how long the party spent doing it, and what avenue (courts vs Senate). Its still the same thing, attacking a duly elected president as illegitimate and trying to remove a duly elected president.
Trump right now is no different than what the dems did for 3.5 years. Both are wrong, but you acting like the dems were better is hilariously biased.
Yeah, again, you are mixing and twisting so many items over the last four years to fit your both sides narratives.
Let's just use a scale of 1-10 for example. Let's say just the Russia stuff was let's say a 5 on the scale of getting rid of the President, impeachment was probably let's say a 7. What Trump is doing is like a 9 or 10.
But, you do you.
posted by QuakerOats
I stick to numbers, reason and logic. To have certain democrat stronghold areas inside swing states go from 55 - 60% historical turnout to 80-90% is a statistical impossibility; not an improbability, an impossibility, without fraud. This is not complicated. The mail-in ballots were the perfect vehicle to deliver the desired result.
I can't wait for the evidence in the courts to back that up...oh...you mean there is actually zero evidence.....
Again, cite the actual court case and evidence or get the fuck out of here with your bullshit.
posted by QuakerOats
I stick to numbers, reason and logic. To have certain democrat stronghold areas inside swing states go from 55 - 60% historical turnout to 80-90% is a statistical impossibility; not an improbability, an impossibility, without fraud. This is not complicated. The mail-in ballots were the perfect vehicle to deliver the desired result.
You're helpful in keeping us current on right wing daily talking points. Whatever crap is posted on conservative Twitter and by Donny Jr., you usually end up posting that very same day.
Just cause Donny Jr. claims something doesn't make it true.
How is a 20% jump impossible without fraud?
plmk.
posted by gutIf you can't laugh at the idea of Comrade Sanders as Labor Secretary, then you probably take politics way too seriously.
That would be funny, but would no way get through a Senate.
Looks like Biden is making run of the mill bureaucratic choices so far.
WSJ is saying Janet Yellen for Treasuery and that...isn't a bad choice.
posted by ptown_trojans_1
Let's just use a scale of 1-10 for example. Let's say just the Russia stuff was let's say a 5 on the scale of getting rid of the President, impeachment was probably let's say a 7. What Trump is doing is like a 9 or 10.
But, you do you.
So wait, impeachment is a 7 and what is currently going on is a 9?
You can’t be fucking serious anymore.
Impeachment, the actual Constitutional way of getting rid of a President is a 7.
Trying to use courts to throw out questionable votes (in their mind, not mine) is a 9.
Read all that again, and say it again. Maybe you will hear how stupid it sounds if you say it out loud?
Come on ptown, the “I’m a moderate really guys?!” schtick is up after that post.
Impeachment is a 7, challenging votes is a 9...seriously I can’t make that shit up.
posted by jmogSo wait, impeachment is a 7 and what is currently going on is a 9?
You can’t be fucking serious anymore.
Impeachment, the actual Constitutional way of getting rid of a President is a 7.
Trying to use courts to throw out questionable votes (in their mind, not mine) is a 9.
Read all that again, and say it again. Maybe you will hear how stupid it sounds if you say it out loud?
Come on ptown, the “I’m a moderate really guys?!” schtick is up after that post.
Impeachment is a 7, challenging votes is a 9...seriously I can’t make that shit up.
How many times in US history has a sitting President or challenger contested the results of the election in US history to this extent in contrast to what his party is saying? Once, and in 2000 when it was one state and a few hundred votes.
Impeachment has been done now twice in the last 25 years....so yes. Impeachment is a 7 and what the President is doing is a 9 or 10.
I don't think you understand how, in terms of US history, how rare and dangerous what President Trump is doing right now.
posted by ptown_trojans_1WSJ is saying Janet Yellen for Treasuery and that...isn't a bad choice.
Not a terrible choice, by any means, but I'm really not a fan of monetizing the debt.
That's the new normal, though. I just hope people don't see that as a license to cut blank checks for all the pet causes.
posted by ptown_trojans_1How many times in US history has a sitting President or challenger contested the results of the election in US history to this extent in contrast to what his party is saying? Once, and in 2000 when it was one state and a few hundred votes.
Impeachment has been done now twice in the last 25 years....so yes. Impeachment is a 7 and what the President is doing is a 9 or 10.
I don't think you understand how, in terms of US history, how rare and dangerous what President Trump is doing right now.
It is quite obvious you are the one that doesn’t understand.
There have been a grand total of 3 Presidents that have been impeached.
There have been 4-5 (depending on source) if heavily contested Presidential elections that have either gone to court or had to be settled by compromises between the two parties through special conventions.
So 3 impeachments, 4 or 5 badly contested elections.
Want to stick with your rarity argument for 9 vs 7 still?
Your confirmation bias is showing.
Contest the election, fine. But don't let your lawyers run around telling everyone they have proof "Trump won by millions of votes"....while not supplying any proof. Even Rush Limbaugh said you can't promise bombshells, and then not produce anything.
Undermining confidence in our elections, both at home and abroad, is easily the worst thing Trump has done. Fortunately, with his history of lying I doubt anyone takes him seriously. Well, aside from millions in the MAGA nation who still believe, without any evidence at all, that Trump won.
