US Election Results!

[grrclark]

9 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

All fair points, although I still stand by the view that many remainers in this country have done far worse standing in the way of democracy with the brexit process here. If trump does as you say and I agree he might, there is no excuse for that and will make him as bad as the remainiacs here. 

I do agree that there was a determined campaign by many to subvert the Brexit vote, including many MPs who openly declared they would ignore the result using an argument of sophistry of it being 'an advisory' plebiscite.

In respect to Trump and his behaviour, I do believe that he would be content to see massive divide in the country he claims to love so much, even if that broke out into systemic violence, so long as it favours his own opinion of himself.  

[12gauge82]

6 minutes ago, grrclark said:

I do agree that there was a determined campaign by many to subvert the Brexit vote, including many MPs who openly declared they would ignore the result using an argument of sophistry of it being 'an advisory' plebiscite.

In respect to Trump and his behaviour, I do believe that he would be content to see massive divide in the country he claims to love so much, even if that broke out into systemic violence, so long as it favours his own opinion of himself.  

Yep, sounds about right 👍

[WalkedUp]

34 minutes ago, grrclark said:

I do agree that there was a determined campaign by many to subvert the Brexit vote, including many MPs who openly declared they would ignore the result using an argument of sophistry of it being 'an advisory' plebiscite.

In respect to Trump and his behaviour, I do believe that he would be content to see massive divide in the country he claims to love so much, even if that broke out into systemic violence, so long as it favours his own opinion of himself.  

Fair points, but I cannot recall for example David Cameron saying the election was rigged / being stolen etc. Anyway, BREXIT is done so let’s not worry about that. 

 

Please watch this. 

2008 - a great vintage for presidential candidates. Such disappointment since then. 

 

Then compare and contrast to this:

 

Edited November 12, 2020 by WalkedUp

[Vince Green]

I don't think that we over here fully realise the damage Trump is inflicting on American politics

neither do we realise how far he may be prepared to push it

Edited November 13, 2020 by Vince Green

[Stonepark]

27 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

I don't think that we over here fully realise the damage Trump is inflicting on American politics

neither do we realise how far he may be prepared to push it

He can only push it as far as the constitution and law allows.... and he has the right to do so.... all the bitching from people complaining about this comes from those who are hoping they have won the election and that nothing comes to light to prove any of DJ's allegations.

[grrclark]

59 minutes ago, Stonepark said:

He can only push it as far as the constitution and law allows.... and he has the right to do so.... all the bitching from people complaining about this comes from those who are hoping they have won the election and that nothing comes to light to prove any of DJ's allegations.

I don’t think that’s reflective of the truth.

When a sitting president starts to make social media broadcasts saying 2.7m votes for him were deleted and on the basis of absolutely no evidence at all, then I think people are quite right to call him and his motivation into question.

When federal agencies are making direct statements to counter what the president is saying what does that say for the state of their administration.

Trump absolutely has a right to expect the election to be fair, but his behaviour is dangerous.

When senior figures in the US military are making public statements that their allegiance is to the country and not any individual, what is their motivation for doing so?

I believe it is because there is a genuine fear among the populace that Trump will try to use the military to retain office.

 

[chrisjpainter]

We have a completed map! 306-232, exactly the same split as last election - only reversed!

[12gauge82]

32 minutes ago, chrisjpainter said:

We have a completed map! 306-232, exactly the same split as last election - only reversed!

To be fair unless trump can show some serious fraud and I've seen nothing yet he'll be finished 

[mick miller]

[WalkedUp]

34 minutes ago, mick miller said:

I assumed this was fake so googled it and it looks real. Ok it was a year after the election but it certainly casts a new light upon the descent of America politics....

[mick miller]

 

Seems reasonable, Nancy is always reasonable I've found over the years 🤣. 

 

Edited November 14, 2020 by mick miller

[derbyduck]

if he dosen't concede and it goes to house of representives each state will have  One Vote  , out of the 50 states 38 are Repuplican !

[chrisjpainter]

53 minutes ago, derbyduck said:

if he dosen't concede and it goes to house of representives each state will have  One Vote  , out of the 50 states 38 are Repuplican !

It only goes to Congress if it's a tie. If he doesn't concede, all that will happen is it'll be ratified by the courts and if he's still in the White House on Inauguration Day the Secret Service will literally come in and take him out. 

First though each state sends its chosen delegates to vote. Theoretically, this is where it could get a bit sticky. The state delegates are literally asked to confirm the pledged votes - 20 delegates for Pennsylvania, 55 for California and so on. There is potential for something called faithless delegates, where the delegates break ranks and refuse to vote for the candidate they've been pledged to. It happened in 2016, turning a 306-232 win for Trump into a confirmed 304-227. If enough delegates either refused to vote for their state's pledged candidates or crossed the line and voted for someone else, then it gets horrendously complicated! I suspect some might refuse to vote for Biden, but probably not enough to do any real damage. The states would probably just deem them to be illegal delegates and either replace them or just cancel their vote.

[toontastic]

7 minutes ago, chrisjpainter said:

It only goes to Congress if it's a tie.  

 

If I've read it right the Senate would vote for president and Congress would vote for vice president in the event of a draw. So we could have had Trump/Harris which would have been very interesting. Biden/Pence would have been no fun at all

Edited November 14, 2020 by toontastic

[grrclark]

It’s a little more complex again in that the law in some states compels the electors to vote for the candidate who won the state and some don’t.

With what seems like all of Trump’s lawsuits falling one by one the inevitability is dawning on Trump that he will very soon be Ex-POTUS.

Even the volume of his tweets claiming some outrageous conspiracy is diminishing.

[WalkedUp]

1 hour ago, mick miller said:

 

Seems reasonable, Nancy is always reasonable I've found over the years 🤣. 

 

What she said and how she said it seem to be utterly reasonable. 

[Mice!]

31 minutes ago, chrisjpainter said:

It only goes to Congress if it's a tie. If he doesn't concede, all that will happen is it'll be ratified by the courts and if he's still in the White House on Inauguration Day the Secret Service will literally come in and take him out. 

First though each state sends its chosen delegates to vote. Theoretically, this is where it could get a bit sticky. The state delegates are literally asked to confirm the pledged votes - 20 delegates for Pennsylvania, 55 for California and so on. There is potential for something called faithless delegates, where the delegates break ranks and refuse to vote for the candidate they've been pledged to. It happened in 2016, turning a 306-232 win for Trump into a confirmed 304-227. If enough delegates either refused to vote for their state's pledged candidates or crossed the line and voted for someone else, then it gets horrendously complicated! I suspect some might refuse to vote for Biden, but probably not enough to do any real damage. The states would probably just deem them to be illegal delegates and either replace them or just cancel their vote.

Not complex at all then!

[mick miller]

43 minutes ago, WalkedUp said:

What she said and how she said it seem to be utterly reasonable. 

I agree, but this is the issue, Nancy knew there were issues in 2004, in 2016 these same issues were evident; accusations of fraud, voter swaps etc. all the same (this was the fabled 'Russian collusion'). 2018, again, some really weird results, with straight Republican districts and states losing their governor for a Democrat candidate.

Krebs was hired by Trump to put in measures to prevent this happening again. Despite the Democrats calling Trump voters 'covid cases' for voting in-person, there was a reason. Voting on the day restricts the amount of predictive data that nefarious bodies may use to predict how to, or where to, manipulate a ballot. This is why he got fired this week, after his minions issued a platitude about 'how these were the most secure elections'. Horlicks.

Watch this, with an open mind, and still tell me you believe the result of an election where most of the country was firmly behind Trump, but that he only lost, by a slim margin, in Democrat controlled states, after counting was suspended for three hours in the dead of night? Because I don't buy it. (maybe I need more tinfoil).
 

 

Edited November 14, 2020 by mick miller

[chrisjpainter]

24 minutes ago, mick miller said:

I agree, but this is the issue, Nancy knew there were issues in 2004, in 2016 these same issues were evident; accusations of fraud, voter swaps etc. all the same (this was the fabled 'Russian collusion'). 2018, again, some really weird results, with straight Republican districts and states losing their governor for a Democrat candidate.

Krebs was hired by Trump to put in measures to prevent this happening again. Despite the Democrats calling Trump voters 'covid cases' for voting in-person, there was a reason. Voting on the day restricts the amount of predictive data that nefarious bodies may use to predict how to, or where to, manipulate a ballot. This is why he got fired this week, after his minions issued a platitude about 'how these were the most secure elections'. Horlicks.

Watch this, with an open mind, and still tell me you believe the result of an election where most of the country was firmly behind Trump, but that he only lost, by a slim margin, in Democrat controlled states, after counting was suspended for three hours in the dead of night? Because I don't buy it. (maybe I need more tinfoil).
 

 

He's lost by the largest margin in the popular vote there's ever been. He's lost the electoral college by a 'landslide margin' (Trump's words, not mine). I don't think you can say that most of the country was firmly behind him given this.

[Rewulf]

https://www.newsweek.com/cnn-under-fire-segment-comparing-trumps-tenure-nazi-germany-1547258

Democrat backing media pull out all stops to demonize the man. 

Yes he's a clown, but shades of hitler, really? 

[southeastpete]

57 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

https://www.newsweek.com/cnn-under-fire-segment-comparing-trumps-tenure-nazi-germany-1547258

Democrat backing media pull out all stops to demonize the man. 

Yes he's a clown, but shades of hitler, really? 

Shades of jimmy saville...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jjgbAN_SaHg

 

[chrisjpainter]

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

https://www.newsweek.com/cnn-under-fire-segment-comparing-trumps-tenure-nazi-germany-1547258

Democrat backing media pull out all stops to demonize the man. 

Yes he's a clown, but shades of hitler, really? 

I think it's a fair comment to make the comparison to that stage of Nazism and Hitler's power. His attempts to demonise the free press, his bypassing of congress with executive orders, his insistence without evidence that a democratic vote against him is rigged, the refusal to condemn far right groups that turn to violence and so on. Obviously it's absurd to compare him to what the Nazi party ultimately looked to achieve with the extermination of 11 million Jews, Poles, communists, artists etc. but his tenure as president does have early doors similarities. Ironically, what have protected America from someone doing a full blown Hitler are a robust constitution and a democratic process - two things Trump's looked to test at any given opportunity!

Actually, the best comparison would probably be to some of the more loony African Presidents. Trevor Noah compared him to African presidents 5 years ago. Since then, if anything, he's become even more like one!

 

[Rewulf]

20 minutes ago, chrisjpainter said:

I think it's a fair comment to make the comparison to that stage of Nazism and Hitler's power.

Usually you come out with good reasoned , albeit left wing comment, but today....

 

22 minutes ago, chrisjpainter said:

Actually, the best comparison would probably be to some of the more loony African Presidents. Trevor Noah compared him to African presidents 5 years ago. Since then, if anything, he's become even more like one!

Ah Mr Noah , the darling of the democrats, a man who actually fled his country as soon as it got rid of apartheid , and went down the route of electing 'loony African presidents'
Fled to America , where he constantly points out how racist it is, and how blacks are subjugated and sidelined.

Trevor Noah is best known for hosting Comedy Central's 'The Daily Show' since September 2015. He is one of the most sought-after hosts in the entertainment industry. As of 2020, Trevor Noah's net worth is roughly $30 million.14 Jul 2020

[Stonepark]

48 minutes ago, chrisjpainter said:

I think it's a unfair comment to make the comparison to that stage of Nazism and Hitler's power. His attempts to demonise the paid for left wing press, his bypassing of a congress which opposed all reasonable suggestions from him with executive orders, his insistence with evidence that a democratic vote against him is rigged by democrats cheating in multiple states and ways, the refusal of the Demicrats to condemn far left groups that turn to violence and so on. Obviously it's absurd to compare Trump to what the Nazi party but the Democrats authoritarian dictacts and leveling agenda ultimately looks to achieve with the extermination of  individuals rights, and ultimately to exterminate any one who opposes them just like Hitler etc. but Bidens tenure as president will have early doors similarities to Hitler's and nay end up worse.

Ironically, what has protected America from someone doing a full blown Hitler are a robust constitution and a democratic process - two things Biden and the democrats are looking to get around or remove at any given opportunity!

 

Sorted it for you!

[Rewulf]

5 minutes ago, Stonepark said:

Sorted it for you!

Spot on