Jump to content

U.S. Politics megathread (merged)


trex

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, JFK-1 said:

 

Well to my knowledge there is only one, and your statement seems a tad bizarre on a topic about an American.

 

I rest my case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 32.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • JFK-1

    2793

  • Maple Leaf

    2199

  • Justin Z

    1584

  • Watt-Zeefuik

    1485

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

33 minutes ago, JackLadd said:

Sick that he says doctors are deliberately certifying covid deaths to make money. You just couldn't imagine anybody here saying garbage like that and collecting votes. 

Don't give Cummings ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks as if Ivanka could end up in the dock along with Trump. He really does have a strange/questionable relationship with her. Or might I say fetish about her? Who could forget the cringe moment when he said if she weren't his daughter he might be dating her?

Even if she weren't his daughter it would still be cringeworthy given she was in her 20's and he his 60's when he said it. The dream of all young 20's girls, dating a pensioner. Maybe they can share a family cell.

Ivanka, who wanted to change the office and title of first lady to first family, can call it the first family cell if she wants to.

Ivanka Trump’s Starring Role in Her Father’s Financial Troubles

If the president’s tax shenanigans land him afoul of the law, the first daughter could go down with him.

https://newrepublic.com/article/159546/ivanka-trump-tax-evasion-foreign-corruption

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joey J J Jr Shabadoo
6 hours ago, JFK-1 said:

 

Well to my knowledge there is only one, and your statement seems a tad bizarre on a topic about an American.

Two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any way, in the event of his losing the election, to circumvent the lunacy of 11 weeks of tantrumistic 'I'll show you...' behaviour that I would not be surprised to see?

 

Could he be declared medically unfit to govern...or might that prevent future trials?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Boof said:

Is there any way, in the event of his losing the election, to circumvent the lunacy of 11 weeks of tantrumistic 'I'll show you...' behaviour that I would not be surprised to see?

 

Could he be declared medically unfit to govern...or might that prevent future trials?

I don't think the other Republicans or Democrats will allow it. 

Shit, my trampoline has just blown away. Feck! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

I don't think the other Republicans or Democrats will allow it. 

 

I suppose I was really wondering if there's any mechanism that can prevent it?

 

6 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Shit, my trampoline has just blown away. Feck! 

 

Uh-oh!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Boof said:

 

I suppose I was really wondering if there's any mechanism that can prevent it?

 

 

Uh-oh!!

:D Just as well for my big 12ft hedge or my van would've had a nice new trampoline sidecar. Or one of the neighbours. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kalamazoo Jambo
1 hour ago, Boof said:

Is there any way, in the event of his losing the election, to circumvent the lunacy of 11 weeks of tantrumistic 'I'll show you...' behaviour that I would not be surprised to see?

 

Could he be declared medically unfit to govern...or might that prevent future trials?


The available remedy here is the same as it’s been throughout Trump’s Presidency - Section 4 the 25th amendment. This would basically require the VP and a majority of the cabinet (and subsequently, two thirds of both House and Senate) to declare the President is unable to perform his duties. The VP would become Acting President. So very unlikely to happen. It’s also a provision that has never been used in history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said:


The available remedy here is the same as it’s been throughout Trump’s Presidency - Section 4 the 25th amendment. This would basically require the VP and a majority of the cabinet (and subsequently, two thirds of both House and Senate) to declare the President is unable to perform his duties. The VP would become Acting President. So very unlikely to happen. It’s also a provision that has never been used in history.

They've surely never had a retiring President as unstable as Trump though. 

He could create havoc before he goes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kalamazoo Jambo
8 minutes ago, luckydug said:

They've surely never had a retiring President as unstable as Trump though. 

He could create havoc before he goes. 


He’s been creating havoc in office for almost four years. The average Republican doesn’t seem to care. Can’t imagine how much worse it would need to be for them to start caring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

I don't think the other Republicans or Democrats will allow it. 

Shit, my trampoline has just blown away. Feck! 

  Its no sae bad, you could have been on it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will he be allowed to pick a fight with another country between loosing the election and the President taking over?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Greedy Jambo said:

Far too many americans on here.GTF

 

Yes. All Hearts supporters should live in Gorgie and nowhere else!

 

:jj_facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said:


He’s been creating havoc in office for almost four years. The average Republican doesn’t seem to care. Can’t imagine how much worse it would need to be for them to start caring.

 

The thing is that there is a large section of the voting public who think that Trump is doing a good job,and has actually been appointed President by God.

 

If he loses the election, which seems likely at this point, he could start a war, pardon thousands of criminals, destroy all the White House records of the last four years, and the Trump cultists would nod their collective heads in approval.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

The thing is that there is a large section of the voting public who think that Trump is doing a good job,and has actually been appointed President by God.

 

If he loses the election, which seems likely at this point, he could start a war, pardon thousands of criminals, destroy all the White House records of the last four years, and the Trump cultists would nod their collective heads in approval.

He's just trying to destroy as much of the NWO deep state apparatus as he can, so he can hinder the baby eating paedo pinko satanic commie *******s that are the Democrats. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Norm said:

He's just trying to destroy as much of the NWO deep state apparatus as he can, so he can hinder the baby eating paedo pinko satanic commie *******s that are the Democrats. 

And every day I pray to Jeebus and thank him for giving us Donald to save us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, alfajambo said:

No Fact Checking Required.

 

Fact checking just completed, and guess what?  Hibs are, as we knew and many others suspected, shite. :laugh:

 

4kk5nw.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

6 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

@Ulysses A four-year thread with over 20,000 posts, and this post wins best ever!   :clap:

 

I'm not so sure, Ron.  I quite liked this one:

 

8 hours ago, ri Alban said:

 

Shit, my trampoline has just blown away. Feck! 

 

:laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

I'm not so sure, Ron.  I quite liked this one:

 

 

:laugh:

 

What I want to see/hear is a Trump squeal. Shit, my combover has just blown away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SpruceBringsteen

It's becoming more and more clear that the republican cheating will get him another 4 plus years. Everyone back in the UK should sit on their hands and applaud though. No way is the place that copies literally everything the US does going to be next.

 

https://twitter.com/chucklindell/status/1322306439944282113?s=20

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching Joe Biden speak after Barack in Michigan. I have not been very complimentary or supportive of Joe, but I have to say he is giving Trump a lesson on how to demean your opponent. The total difference between the two is Biden sounds like this is how he talks, Trump sounds like he has been told you have to talk like this to sound like a hard man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Starting to worry the buffoon is going to grift out a win via suppression and bent courts. Enough idiots out there to make that happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Biden event cancelled after pro-Trump convoy surrounds bus

The Biden campaign cancelled an event in Texas after it said a convoy of Trump supporters tried to stop a bus on a highway in the state.

Staff on the bus called 911 as cars flying Trump flags pulled in front and slowed down as the bus was travelling from San Antonio to Austin, the Biden campaign said.

Video of one pro-Trump vehicle appearing to strike another vehicle was posted on social media. Police later escorted the bus to its destination, according to the Washington Post newspaper.

The Biden campaign then cancelled the planned event "for security reasons", according to Democratic Congresswoman Sheryl Cole.

“Rather than engage in productive conversation about the drastically different visions that Joe Biden and Donald Trump have for our country, Trump supporters in Texas [Friday] instead decided to put our staff, surrogates, supporters, and others in harm’s way,” local Biden campaign spokesman Tariq Thowfeek told US media.

President Trump later tweeted "I love Texas!" along with a video showing his supporters surrounding the bus.

Polls in the state have tightened but still show Mr Trump with a narrow lead, according to Real Clear Politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, the intimidation is cranking up and we will see it peak over the next couple of days. On top of various other underhand methods of suppressing votes.

As the below article mentions Trump has been requesting 'volunteers' including retired police the Republicans are calling poll "challengers" to 'monitor polling stations. WTF is a poll "challenger"? 

 

As police unions endorse Trump, some worry officers displaying bias could be intimidating at the polls, affect voting
 

Quote

A New York City police officer used his squad car loudspeaker to chant “Trump 2020” at passersby in Brooklyn. A uniformed police officer walked into an early voting station in Miami wearing a “TRUMP 2020” face mask.

And the country’s biggest police labor union used a photo of a Philadelphia police officer holding a toddler to peddle the false narrative that police had rescued him from “complete lawlessness” amid the city’s protests while urging people to vote for President Trump to promote “law and order.”

The series of incidents in the final days of the presidential election have led some Democratic voters, activists and organizations that monitor extremist groups to raise concerns about the potential for political bias among the police officers and sheriff’s deputies tasked with safeguarding the 2020 vote.

Several vocal police unions have endorsed President Trump, there have been several reports of uniformed police officers expressing explicit preference for the president in public, and there have been complaints of coziness or bias shown by some officers toward armed right-wing groups and self-described militias. The incidents have added to an already heightened climate of tension across the country.

Trump, who has been trailing in polls and has repeatedly attacked the election’s integrity, called this summer for law enforcement officers to patrol voting sites, which raised the specter of tactics historically used to scare minority voters.

Current and former law enforcement officials say that during recent elections, police in many cases have tried to avoid polling places to not appear as an intimidating force for voters.

But this year, with the potential for widespread unrest amid social justice protests and intense political tensions nationwide, police have done unusually extensive planning, with officials saying they are dispatching more officers than prior years given the fraught atmosphere.

In Florida, Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri told reporters last week that his office had decided to position sheriff’s deputies at all five early voting sites — the opposite of his earlier plans to avoid them to prevent people from feeling “intimidated or uncomfortable” — after armed men who claimed to work for the Trump campaign showed up outside a voting precinct.

Gualtieri said he hopes the deputies’ presence up through the end of early voting on Nov. 2 will instead provide “a calming presence.”

But Gaultieri also defended the presence of armed men who had provoked the allegations of voter intimidation, saying they were licensed security who had done nothing illegal, and were “just standing there, minding their own business.”

Some of the county’s Democratic constituents have accused Gualtieri — a Republican of rising national stature, who was appointed earlier this year to Trump’s Presidential Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice — of pro-Trump bias.

“In downtown St. Petersburg, every day, there are Trump supporters waving flags on all of the corners surrounding the polling place, and police regularly drive by to give them waves and thumbs up,” said Danny Robinson, whose Web and media company is across the street from City Hall, one of the Pinellas County polling stations. He said Trump supporters respond with shouts of “Back the blue!” to police via megaphones.

A spokesman for Gaultieri did not respond to a request for comment.

Robinson echoed the allegations made by protesters in other parts of the country throughout a summer of racial reckoning, when police officers were sometimes accused of having cozy relationships — and friendly exchanges — with right-wing counterprotesters or militia-styled groups.

That experience now underpins much of the concern from liberals about police bias on Election Day, as the Trump campaign has called for a “Trump Army” to watch the polls for fraud.

“I think that, unfortunately, what we’ve seen over the past several months is that there is a friendly relationship that emerges between members of law enforcement and far-right militias or at least a perceived friendly relationship on the part of the far right,” said Cassie Miller, a senior research analyst at the Southern Poverty Law Center.

In one of the most noteworthy examples in recent months, Miller pointed to a friendly exchange, captured on video, between an armed White teenager, Kyle Rittenhouse, and police in Kenosha, Wis., minutes before Rittenhouse opened fire and killed two protesters in what his lawyers say was an act of self-defense.

In the video, which surfaced after the shooting, a police officer offers Rittenhouse bottled water and thanks him for being there.

Law enforcement is not fundamentally apolitical — many law enforcement leaders are elected members of political parties or are appointed by political leaders — but they are sworn to protect people equally and without bias.

As private U.S. citizens, they can vote and express political opinions, and many elected sheriffs nationwide are vocal about those opinions, especially their support for “law and order” policies or laws that are tough on immigration.

Trump, since his first run in 2016, has repeatedly garnered the endorsement of some of the country’s most contentious and politicized sheriffs and law enforcement union leaders, including former sheriffs Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., and David Clarke of Milwaukee County, Wis., who repeatedly stumped for Trump during his 2016 campaign, while they held office.

Trump later pardoned Arpaio of a misdemeanor conviction for racial profiling.

The president has made his unwavering loyalty to the country’s embattled police departments a core component of his reelection campaign, particularly in the face of this summer’s protests, which Trump and his conservative allies have painted as anarchic, anti-American and fueled by Democratic rage.

The country’s largest police union — the Fraternal Order of Police — as well as the largest police union in New York City and the Chicago Fraternal Order of Police are among the many law enforcement unions that have endorsed Trump.

Michael McHale, the president of the National Association of Police Organizations, spoke at the Republican National Convention this year, calling Trump “the most pro-law enforcement president we’ve ever had.”

Endorsements also have come from several law enforcement unions in critical battleground states, including the leading police organization in Michigan, a state where monitoring groups like the SPLC fear that self-styled militias could seek to “protect” the polls on behalf of Trump.

Armed Michiganders gathered at the State Capitol — and entered, with their guns — to protest Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s coronavirus-related orders earlier this year.

Fears of violence on Election Day were heightened after the FBI infiltrated a group of self-described militia members who allegedly were plotting to kidnap her. One Michigan sheriff, Dar Leaf of Barry County, had appeared onstage in May with one of the alleged conspirators.

When the state government earlier this month sought to ban the open carry of firearms inside polling facilities, Michigan law enforcement organizations, along with several county sheriffs, promptly said they would not enforce it. A judge blocked that order after pro-gun groups challenged it; state officials are appealing.

Bob Kroll, president of the 900-member Minneapolis Police Federation, appeared with Trump at a rally last year, wearing a “Cops for Trump” shirt that the union sells on its website. Kroll said the Obama administration had stymied and oppressed police, but Trump had returned to letting cops do their job, putting “handcuffs on the criminals instead of us.”

Kroll this week relayed a request to the union from the Trump campaign, asking for 20 to 30 retired officers to serve as Election Day poll “challengers” in a “problem area” of Minneapolis, the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported.

The union’s apparent willingness to help the Trump campaign immediately drew criticism from the city’s police chief, state attorney general, secretary of state and others.

“We don’t necessarily want our Poll Challengers to look intimidating, they cannot carry a weapon in the polls due to state law,” Trump campaign attorney William Willingham wrote in the letter to the union. “We just want people who won’t be afraid in rough neighborhoods or intimidating situations.”

Kroll did not respond to requests for comment this week and Willingham declined to comment when reached Friday.

Thea McDonald, a spokesperson for the Trump campaign, said Willingham is a volunteer assisting in Minnesota and acted on his own accord: “Neither the Trump Campaign nor the RNC instructed him to send this email.”

But McDonald added that police must be able to act as citizens too.

“Retired police officers are members of their communities, and as such are well within their rights to participate and volunteer as rule-abiding poll watchers,” McDonald said.

According to local regulations, political parties can send one challenger to each precinct in Minnesota. The party designees must only carry a letter showing they are there on the party’s behalf, and they are supposed to stay six feet from any voter and challenge only the ballots of those they have direct, personal knowledge of not living in their precinct.

Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo quickly issued a statement reminding officers that they have “taken a solemn oath to protect the constitutional rights of all without favor or bias.” He said that oath remains for officers whether are “on or off duty.”

Experts say law enforcement bias or even perceived bias is problematic during an election not just because voters for the opposite party might feel intimidated, but because it can serve to embolden armed extremist groups.

“That can be a really dangerous development, because these armed vigilantes then essentially feel that they have a green light to go impose order,” Miller said.

Craig B. Futterman, a University of Chicago law professor and director of the Civil Rights and Police Accountability Project, viewed Trump’s call for law enforcement officers to protect the polls as a dog whistle to racists and extreme actors on the right, who would rather not see minorities vote because they tend to align with Democrats.

There is “a long history of police in this country who have played an active role in voter suppression and voter intimidation, particularly of Black folks,” he said.

As protests against policing tactics and racial injustice swept the country this year, some local and federal law enforcement authorities, along with Trump, have focused their public commentary on cases of violence, looting or property damage.

Trump and his allies have denounced the demonstrators as dangerous and out-of-control, particularly in cities they view as hostile to the president’s agenda, such as Portland, Ore., Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia.

During unrest after police fatally shot Walter Wallace Jr. in his west Philadelphia neighborhood Monday, the national Fraternal Order of Police used social media to share a tale of police rescuing a lost toddler from the protests there and described officers as “the only thing standing between order & anarchy” — echoing language it had used while backing Trump.

In fact, police had seized the boy from his car seat after smashing the windows on his mother’s car and violently arresting her, the woman’s lawyer says.

The lawyer said she drove inadvertently onto a street where police were confronting protesters. The police union later took down the posts, saying it had “subsequently learned of conflicting accounts” about what happened.

In New York, Terence A. Monahan, chief of department for the city’s police force, said during a recent election briefing that officers could effectively conduct their duties without any political bias, describing them as “apolitical” once they put on their uniforms, even though the city’s largest police union had endorsed Trump. The NYPD will have uniformed officers at every “at every polling location,” to secure the election, Monahan said.

Days later, the department said it was opening an investigation and suspending an officer without pay after a viral online video captured the officer in Brooklyn using his squad car loudspeaker to promote the president and taunt onlookers.

“Trump 2020,” the officer says in the video. “You can put it on YouTube, put it on Facebook. Trump 2020.”

Dermot Shea, the New York police commissioner, posted on Twitter that the video was “one hundred percent unacceptable.

Trump later weighed in, tweeting: “Get that great Officer back to work!”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/election-police-officers-bias/2020/10/31/78eba664-1ae8-11eb-82db-60b15c874105_story.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is quite mental.

 

Trump is going to try and declare a landslide victory... he'll probably go for something entirely unbelievable like 92%. But whatever he says, his supporters will deny any Biden victory and start a civil war.

 

Quite concerned about what's likely to happen in the US these coming days.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

Yep, the intimidation is cranking up and we will see it peak over the next couple of days. On top of various other underhand methods of suppressing votes.

As the below article mentions Trump has been requesting 'volunteers' including retired police the Republicans are calling poll "challengers" to 'monitor polling stations. WTF is a poll "challenger"? 

 

As police unions endorse Trump, some worry officers displaying bias could be intimidating at the polls, affect voting
 

 

 

Life is so strange, s a kid we had our run ins with the police but actually always respected them, and in a way admired how they dealt with us. As a policeman I wasn't always happy with what I had to do. but it was the job, and we did what we had to. I was never ashamed to put on the uniform, never in retirement afraid or ashamed  to state if asked what I did before retirement. I am still proud of my service, but I am sad to say that particularly police in the United States are losing and not far from completely any respect or connection I may have felt for or with them. No big deal to them, what am I, an old has been. But I have been something they never will, honest, true, and nobodys puppet.

Edited by Sharpie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sharpie said:

 

Life is so strange, s a kid we had our run ins with the police but actually always respected them, and in a way admired how they dealt with us. As a policeman I wasn't always happy with what I had to do. but it was the job, and we did what we had to. I was never ashamed to put on the uniform, never in retirement afraid or ashamed  to state if asked what I did before retirement. I am still proud of my service, but I am sad to say that particularly police in the United States are losing and not far from completely any respect or connection I may have felt for or with them. No big deal to them, hat am I, an old has been. But I have been something they never will, honest, true, and nobodys puppet.

 

Well as a man with law enforcement experience perhaps you could enlighten me on what "poll challenger" is supposed to mean. And this quote from the article.
 

Quote

Michael McHale, the president of the National Association of Police Organizations, spoke at the Republican National Convention this year, calling Trump “the most pro-law enforcement president we’ve ever had.”

 

The most pro-law enforcement president we have ever had. If you take out his known decades long tax fiddling I suppose. You see I thought those tax laws were actual "laws".

Not optional suggestions.

Edited by JFK-1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reports claim Trump is going to declare victory on Election Night if it looks like he is ahead at any point.

 

So Republican strongholds will be tallied up first and then all hell is going to break loose.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JFK-1 said:

 

Well as a man with law enforcement experience perhaps you could enlighten me on what "poll challenger" is supposed to mean. And this quote from the article.
 

 

The most pro-law enforcement president we have ever had. If you take out his known decades long tax fiddling I suppose. You see I thought those tax laws were actual "laws".

Not optional suggestions.

 With reference to poll challenger, a phrase I have never heard until this election.

This is what I have absolutely no understanding of, how the police, particularly the Association heads can endorse a man who more than likely could be Tried on numerous criminal charges such as the ones to which you refer and others on the conclusion of his protection as President is to say the least astonishing. There was always a word of caution on relationships that could cause embarrassment to the individual or the department, this hole Trump situation i s mind boggling, but it does reveal from the Associations deference to Trump and some of the things I have read that Associations are looking for different policing  than I worked in, to defend a man for disciplinary charges eighteen times and have him returned to duty totally amazes me. When i/c a department I had dealings with an Association, but mostly common sense prevailed. USA police at this time are quite frightening, I can understand that there will be people who disagree, but stay mum because they also need the job, but the way it seems to be going they will be delegated to do something that they find objectionable, thats when the adage piss or get off the pot comes into consideration.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kila said:

It is quite mental.

 

Trump is going to try and declare a landslide victory... he'll probably go for something entirely unbelievable like 92%. But whatever he says, his supporters will deny any Biden victory and start a civil war.

 

Quite concerned about what's likely to happen in the US these coming days.

 

 

Even Mugabe was happy enough to win by 61%, just so as to give it some credibility.

 

However Trump wants to be like his bumchum Kim, so 92% is probably about right.  😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The typical trump voter is God, guns, white and Republican.  IQ is optional.

 

Biden will win in a canter. A more appealing candidate would really have cleaned up.

 

The Dems will strengthen their hold on the house and take back the Senate.  The supreme court will be firmly in their sights over the next 2 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not impossible for Trump to pull off another shock, but it is unlikely. If he did it would be another very narrow margin. Biden on the other hand has a realistic chance of a landslide victory.

The professional forecasters are giving Trump a 1 in 10 chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

It's not impossible for Trump to pull off another shock, but it is unlikely. If he did it would be another very narrow margin. Biden on the other hand has a realistic chance of a landslide victory.

The professional forecasters are giving Trump a 1 in 10 chance.

The forecasters also had Hillary to win, brexit to fail, and Scottish independence to win. 
This worries me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Boy Named Crow
4 minutes ago, Tazio said:

The forecasters also had Hillary to win, brexit to fail, and Scottish independence to win. 
This worries me. 

Aye, for whatever reason,  polling seems to be badly broken in the modern era. Just need to wait and see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Tazio said:

The forecasters also had Hillary to win, brexit to fail, and Scottish independence to win. 
This worries me. 

One poll put independence in the lead which lead to fake promises to blackmail a win. 

As for Brexit, I knew that was a leave. Oh and Hilary had 3 m more votes than DT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think this election can be compared to 2016. Trump was an unknown quantity and people were voting against Clinton not because she was the lesser candidate but simply because of a personal dislike I didn't understand.

This time Trump is a known quantity, a total idiot everyone knows is an idiot. There have been countless examples of his extreme stupidity, I will offer drinking/injecting bleach as just one example.

A failed businessman, a tax cheat, sheer incompetence with a pandemic raging. And so much more.

This time around aside from Trumps stupidity and incompetence being well known he's up against Biden who is a likeable man. Likeable and vastly experienced in the political arena. Someone who can be relied on to form a competent professional administration.

This bears no resemblance to 2016.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching the "fake news" for a while tonight, they seem to be saying it might be closer than the polls are showing. The whole thing it seems hangs on places like Florida, Pennsylvania and a couple of other states for the Electoral College which was the decider last time. Tuesday night is going to be interesting.  

I watched some of John McCains Presidential contest with Obama. What a difference, showing respect and not allowing insulting comments about his opponent, then you watch this present mud slinging, insulting names by Trump, and lies, lies lies and more lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JFK-1 said:

It's not impossible for Trump to pull off another shock, but it is unlikely. If he did it would be another very narrow margin. Biden on the other hand has a realistic chance of a landslide victory.

The professional forecasters are giving Trump a 1 in 10 chance.

 

The Shy Trumpets are giving me the fear

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Kalamazoo Jambo changed the title to U.S. Politics megathread (title updated)
  • Maple Leaf changed the title to U.S. Politics megathread (merged)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...