If Trump loses and refuses to leave

[TBBills]

Just now, Doc said:

 

And then the 25th amendment...

Here we go more deep state bull#### from the Trumpies 

[jrober38]

10 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I don’t see it happening. 
 

However, if it’s legal—and I question stories like this intended to rule up low information voters and overly emotional nimrods—-the process would be designed to do exactly the opposite of what you’re suggesting. He would not be overturning the election, he would simply be seeking the appropriate resolution to a hotly contested election.  We’re a nation of laws, and pursuit of a just outcome is reasonable even if you feel it kicks you in the niblets.
 

 Credit to the author though for acknowledging what few here see as true, but what is obvious to the informed—Biden is the media president only at this point.  

It’s going to be an interesting couple weeks. 

 

The election wasn't hotly contested.

 

In fact it wasn't contested at all by people who are living in reality.

 

Trump is now 1-25 in court. Without evidence, which he has none of, no logical person can actually think the election was contested. 

The results were clear as day.

[oldmanfan]

15 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I don’t see it happening. 
 

However, if it’s legal—and I question stories like this intended to rule up low information voters and overly emotional nimrods—-the process would be designed to do exactly the opposite of what you’re suggesting. He would not be overturning the election, he would simply be seeking the appropriate resolution to a hotly contested election.  We’re a nation of laws, and pursuit of a just outcome is reasonable even if you feel it kicks you in the niblets.
 

 Credit to the author though for acknowledging what few here see as true, but what is obvious to the informed—Biden is the media president only at this point.  

It’s going to be an interesting couple weeks. 

If the state legislatures did something like is being described it would disenfranchise the voters, which is antithetical to a democratic form of government.

[TBBills]

Trump's timeline is great...

So he tells all his republican cult followers "Don't vote by mail" he did that so he can in the case of him losing commit voter fraud by trying and having those votes be not counted in the election. 

 

Come election day the in person votes counted first, after that the mail in ballots were counted (this was wanted by Trump and he knew how the votes would be counted)

 

The day after once the mail in ballots started getting counted he begins losing b.c the democrats are catching up all b.c of paragraph 1..

 

Trump than executes his plan of saying mail in ballots are not legal and calling fraud.

 

The only problem with the last part is he didn't expect his lawyers to not lie for him in the courts. So what ended up happening is the court cases all got thrown out b.c the lawyers refused to lie for Trump and risk getting in major trouble.

 

In comes Rudy GIULIANI, a corrupt little man who is willing to get in Trump's bed of corruption b.c Trump is paying the guy a ***** ton of money that was donated by Trumpies.

 

The best part is all of this is documented and in the end all Trump is doing is hurting this country.

The judges that ruled against Trump were mostly republican and they put the law above their political side.

Edited November 18, 2020 by TBBills

[jrober38]

8 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

If the state legislatures did something like is being described it would disenfranchise the voters, which is antithetical to a democratic form of government.

 

A lot of Trump supporters are proud to say they don't live in a Democracy, and that they live in a Republic.

They fundamentally don't believe that a majority should rule, which makes it easier I think for them to gravitate towards an autocrat-type politician like Trump because ultimately they don't believe in Democracy anyways. All they care about is being in power, and forcing their grossly unpopular ideas down peoples throats. 

 

Edit: In all seriousness, if Trump announced today that he was throwing Joe Biden in jail, and announced himself the winner of the election and that he'd stay in power indefinitely and that no elections would be held in 4 years for President, I think a rather large portion of Trump's base would be totally fine with that plan. 

Edited November 18, 2020 by jrober38

[shoshin]

8 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

Edit: In all seriousness, if Trump announced today that he was throwing Joe Biden in jail, and announced himself the winner of the election and that he'd stay in power indefinitely and that no elections would be held in 4 years for President, I think a rather large portion of Trump's base would be totally fine with that plan. 

 

Unquestionably. 

[SoCal Deek]

7 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

All they care about is being in power, and forcing their grossly unpopular ideas down peoples throats. 

 

Im honestly curious...what grossly unpopular ideas do you think that Republicans support? 

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

Im honestly curious...what grossly unpopular ideas do you think that Republicans support? 

 

Not allowing abortion, not supporting marriage equality, not supporting medicare for all. 

1 minute ago, shoshin said:

 

Unquestionably. 

 

Right. And I think Trump knows this.

 

I think the longer he hides in his basement trying to rile up his supporters I think the more dangerous he becomes to democracy in the US. 

Edited November 18, 2020 by jrober38

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, jrober38 said:

 

Not allowing abortion, not supporting marriage equality, not supporting medicare for all. 

Yikes! At least I know where you’re coming from. I think you’d find that most Republicans voters (not office holders) are actually more concerned with limiting the size of government than all other issues combined. 

[jrober38]

4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Yikes! At least I know where you’re coming from. I think you’d find that most Republicans voters (not office holders) are actually more concerned with limiting the size of government than all other issues combined. 

 

I think you're wrong.

 

Republicans say they care about the size of government and government spending, but when they've been in power over the last 40 years the debt and spending have ballooned. Trump inherited a $500 billion dollar deficit and turned it into a $1.1 trillion dollar deficit in 3 years. Bush blew up the debt before him, and Reagan got the whole thing started back in the 80s.

Actions speak louder than words, and in this case it's pretty clear that GOP voters don't give a crap about the size of government or spending. 

 

They say they do, but really they want to ram their social beliefs down peoples throats even though in most cases at least two thirds of the country disagrees with them. 

 

The fact that Tea Party voters support Trump is one of the biggest hypocrisies of all time. It's almost like when the black guy they hated left the White House, the size of government and government spending didn't matter anymore. 

Edited November 18, 2020 by jrober38

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, jrober38 said:

 

I think you're wrong.

 

Republicans say they care about the size of government and government spending, but when they've been in power over the last 40 years the debt and spending have ballooned. Trump inherited a $500 billion dollar deficit and turned it into a $1.1 trillion dollar deficit in 3 years. Bush blew up the debt before him, and Reagan got the whole thing started back in the 80s.

 

Actions speak louder than words, and in this case it's pretty clear that GOP voters don't give a crap about the size of government or spending. 

 

They say they do, but really they want to ram their social beliefs down peoples throats even though in most cases at least two thirds of the country disagrees with them. 

I agree with you on the spending for sure. 
But on the social issues we’ve had abortion for decades....and we now have same sex 

‘marriage’. So is this all about universal healthcare to you in 2021? Is that it? Will we be done then? 

[jrober38]

6 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I agree with you on the spending for sure. 
But on the social issues we’ve had abortion for decades....and we now have same sex 

‘marriage’. So is this all about universal healthcare to you in 2021? Is that it? Will we be done then? 

 

Dude, talk to me in a couple years after GOP Religious Zealots at the State level keep sending lawsuit after lawsuit to the supreme court trying to strike down abortion rights and marriage equality rights. 

 

And spending and size of government are essentially the same thing. The Tea Party whined and complained for 8 years about the deficit under Obama, and the day he was gone they shut up, and now support a guy who has cut taxes and ballooned spending when the economy was doing great. They support a guy who doubled the deficit in 3 years, without being in a major war, when the economy was great. 

 

Anyone with any financial sense would know that it's probably a good idea to save for a rainy day when you have your best years every fiscally. Pay down your debts, and get your fiscal house in order. Instead, Trump did the exact opposite, and the "Conservative" supporters loved him for it.

Edited November 18, 2020 by jrober38

[SoCal Deek]

2 minutes ago, Big Gun said:

Explain to me why my tax dollars should go to medical care for people who refuse to work?

Interestingly enough your tax dollars already do go to it. Nobody is denied care in America. My problem with universal healthcare is that I’ve yet to see a program run by the federal government that delivers services with any degree of efficiency and/or quality. Luckily I’m not a big consumer of healthcare...knock on wood. 

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

Interestingly enough your tax dollars already do go to it. Nobody is denied care in America. My problem with universal healthcare is that I’ve yet to see a program run by the federal government that delivers services with any degree of efficiency and/or quality. Luckily I’m not a big consumer of healthcare...knock on wood. 

 

This is what doesn't make any sense.

 

You care about efficiency, but US healthcare literally costs at least double that of anywhere else in the developed world.

[SoCal Deek]

8 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Dude, talk to me in a couple years after GOP Religious Zealots at the State level keep sending lawsuit after lawsuit to the supreme court trying to strike down abortion rights and marriage equality rights. 

 

And spending and size of government are essentially the same thing. The Tea Party whined and complained for 8 years about the deficit under Obama, and the day he was gone they shut up, and now support a guy who has cut taxes and ballooned spending when the economy was doing great.

 

Anyone with any financial sense would know that it's probably a good idea to save for a rainy day when you have your best years every fiscally. Pay down your debts, and get your fiscal house in order. Instead, Trump did the exact opposite, and the "Conservative" supporters loved him for it.

That’s honestly a decent debate and I thank you for engaging. However, I don’t think that’s what most Trump supporters were most enamored with. I don’t recall Trump mentioning gay marriage in the last four years, and it certainly wasn’t brought up in the campaign by ANYONE. Now... the economic policies are indeed interesting. It’s the age old debate of increasing taxes vs cutting spending. I don’t think either of us will see that debate end in our lifetime.

5 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

This is what doesn't make any sense.

 

You care about efficiency, but US healthcare literally costs at least double that of anywhere else in the developed world.

We can go around and around on that one. Bottom line cost is NOT the answer when you go to see your doctor. I’m going to guess that most people run TOWARDS the USA when they want to be cured, not AWAY from it towards other ‘developed’ countries....but I may be wrong.

Edited November 18, 2020 by SoCal Deek

[jrober38]

6 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

That’s honestly a decent debate and I thank you for engaging. However, I don’t think that’s what most Trump supporters were most enamored with. I don’t recall Trump mentioning gay marriage in the last four years, and it certainly wasn’t brought up in the campaign by ANYONE. Now... the economic policies are indeed interesting. It’s the age old debate of increasing taxes vs cutting spending. I don’t think either of us will see that debate end in our lifetime.

 

Fine. We can ignore marriage because he hasn't spoken about it, but abortion has been a reliable talking point. 

 

I honestly don't think you can win enough primaries and become nominee of the GOP without having a firm stance against abortion, which means it'll always be a talking point on the national stage. And like I said, I think there is a very real chance that Roe v Wade is challenged seriously now that there's a heavily tilted SC to the conservative side.

 

Regarding taxes, the GOP tax plans haven't changed in 40 years. Cut taxes for the rich, and rely on trickle down economics which have practically no evidence of actually working.

 

Since Reagan, the wealth gap between the rich and middle class has become a chasm, as the poor and middle class have been left to pick up a disproportionate share of the tax burden. Due to tax breaks for the rich, billionaires often pay less marginal tax than the average worker making $40k a year. 

 

At some point a Bernie Sanders type left wing politician is going to run, and win, and they're going to tax the hell out of the top 5% of earners in the US, and everyone else will likely be better off as a result. Instead of cutting taxes for the top 5%, I'd love to see taxes raised significantly on the top 5%, with reasonable tax cuts for everyone else.

Edited November 18, 2020 by jrober38

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

31 minutes ago, TBBills said:

You really think that si what he is trying to do? He has been trying to rig this part of the election since the beginning of this year with the mail in voting bull####. Only problem he is having is his lawyers are actually not allowed to lie int he courts which is why his ***** keeps getting thrown out. 

 

The only person willing to be as corrupt as him is Rudy GIULIANI... Which is why he is finally screwed. He isn't doing this for some sort of justice thing...

Do I think he’s pursuing legal challenges?  Yes, I’ve said that all along.  
 

Do I think he should?  Yes, if he feels the evidence supports his contention.  
 

Do I think it does?  Yes, I’m getting there and feel it’s worth some hurt feelings on your side of things to fight the good fight.  
 

The concerns about election security predate this year.  In 2018, specific concerns were raised about dominion and the integrity of elections.  Was DJT OR R leadership setting the table for this legal challenge 2 years ago when this concern was raised?  

 

“In 2018 alone, 'voters in South Carolina [were] reporting machines that switched their votes after they'd inputted them, scanners [were] rejecting paper ballots in Missouri, and busted machines [were] causing long lines in Indiana,'” the letter reads. “In addition, researchers recently uncovered previously undisclosed vulnerabilities in "nearly three dozen backend election systems in 10 states." And, just this year, after the Democratic candidate's electronic tally showed he received 164 votes out of 55,000 cast in a Pennsylvania state judicial election in 2019, the county's Republican chairwoman said, "nothing went right on Election Day. Everything went wrong. That's a problem." 

 

The letter continued: “These problems threaten the integrity of our elections and demonstrate the importance of election systems that are strong, durable, and not vulnerable to attack.”

 

[jrober38]

7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

We can go around and around on that one. Bottom line cost is NOT the answer when you go to see your doctor. I’m going to guess that most people run TOWARDS the USA when they want to be cured, not AWAY from it towards other ‘developed’ countries....but I may be wrong.

 

Obviously.

 

But I'm not talking about developing countries.

 

I'm talking about actual developed, western world countries where people live longer, and pay a LOT less than Americans for the same healthcare. 

1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Do I think he’s pursuing legal challenges?  Yes, I’ve said that all along.  
 

Do I think he should?  Yes, if he feels the evidence supports his contention.  
 

Do I think it does?  Yes, I’m getting there and feel it’s worth some hurt feelings on your side of things to fight the good fight.  
 

The concerns about election security predate this year.  In 2018, specific concerns were raised about dominion and the integrity of elections.  Was DJT OR R leadership setting the table for this legal challenge 2 years ago when this concern was raised?  

 

“In 2018 alone, 'voters in South Carolina [were] reporting machines that switched their votes after they'd inputted them, scanners [were] rejecting paper ballots in Missouri, and busted machines [were] causing long lines in Indiana,'” the letter reads. “In addition, researchers recently uncovered previously undisclosed vulnerabilities in "nearly three dozen backend election systems in 10 states." And, just this year, after the Democratic candidate's electronic tally showed he received 164 votes out of 55,000 cast in a Pennsylvania state judicial election in 2019, the county's Republican chairwoman said, "nothing went right on Election Day. Everything went wrong. That's a problem." 

 

The letter continued: “These problems threaten the integrity of our elections and demonstrate the importance of election systems that are strong, durable, and not vulnerable to attack.”

 

 

WHAT EVIDENCE!?!?

[TBBills]

3 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Do I think he’s pursuing legal challenges?  Yes, I’ve said that all along.  
 

Do I think he should?  Yes, if he feels the evidence supports his contention.  
 

Do I think it does?  Yes, I’m getting there and feel it’s worth some hurt feelings on your side of things to fight the good fight.  
 

The concerns about election security predate this year.  In 2018, specific concerns were raised about dominion and the integrity of elections.  Was DJT OR R leadership setting the table for this legal challenge 2 years ago when this concern was raised?  

 

“In 2018 alone, 'voters in South Carolina [were] reporting machines that switched their votes after they'd inputted them, scanners [were] rejecting paper ballots in Missouri, and busted machines [were] causing long lines in Indiana,'” the letter reads. “In addition, researchers recently uncovered previously undisclosed vulnerabilities in "nearly three dozen backend election systems in 10 states." And, just this year, after the Democratic candidate's electronic tally showed he received 164 votes out of 55,000 cast in a Pennsylvania state judicial election in 2019, the county's Republican chairwoman said, "nothing went right on Election Day. Everything went wrong. That's a problem." 

 

The letter continued: “These problems threaten the integrity of our elections and demonstrate the importance of election systems that are strong, durable, and not vulnerable to attack.”

 

Evidence not hearsay....

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

48 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

The election wasn't hotly contested.

 

In fact it wasn't contested at all by people who are living in reality.

 

Trump is now 1-25 in court. Without evidence, which he has none of, no logical person can actually think the election was contested. 

The results were clear as day.

Ok jrobs, the election hasn’t been contested at all. What are you complaining about? 

44 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

If the state legislatures did something like is being described it would disenfranchise the voters, which is antithetical to a democratic form of government.

It would not disenfranchise anyone if the vote was illegitimate.  It would most definitely disenfranchise if the vote was legitimate.  

23 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Obviously.

 

But I'm not talking about developing countries.

 

I'm talking about actual developed, western world countries where people live longer, and pay a LOT less than Americans for the same healthcare. 

 

WHAT EVIDENCE!?!?

Is the question for me, today, or are you referencing the statement on election integrity in 2018?  The statement outlines the vote switching from 2 years ago.  Is that not sufficient evidence for you?