2020 US Election (Part One)

[Cloud_Strife]

The Republicans are hellbent on ensuring turnout is low, they close polling stations in certain communities, pass laws to ensure convicts can't vote, even students who can vote aren't free from this disenfranchisement...

 

[Lexicus]

Nothing that just a few percentage points in the turnout rate can't beat. But again turnout is the ultimate determining factor.

Yes, so we are talking at cross purposes here because I am talking precisely about forms of cheating that a few percentage points of turnout cannot beat. The key phrase was "with all the power at its disposal."

The GOP has, hitherto, exercised relative restraint in its electoral shenanigans. I would say the election in Georgia last year, where the GOP candidate was also actually in charge of overseeing the election, may have crossed the line. But I don't think we can trust the states under GOP control not to just rig the ballots for Trump. As El_Mach has noted if Trump looks like losing he can always declare the election illegitimate due to illegal voting - do you really believe the GOP would be suddenly come to its senses if he did so? I don't.

 

[rah]

But the numbers are still there to overcome it. It just requires turnout.
I agree that it's happening. Just that it's not a done deal yet.

 

[Lexicus]

Do you know what "ballot-rigging" is? You sound like an idiot when you say that more turnout can overcome it.

edit: sorry for that, too harsh, but like...idk what else to say.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

There's no point Lexicus, he still thinks sheer numbers trump the insitutional power exerted by the GOP, even as history shows this to be false, even as the last election shows his beliefs to be false.

 

[Berzerker]

This is textbook goalpost moving. You said:

In response @Lemon Merchant proved you wrong by providing you with a direct quote of Trump calling Mexicans rapists. So then you respond by essentially saying "Well he only called some Mexicans rapists, and anyway they are rapists so he wasn't lying." So you admit he called Mexicans rapists but then try to pretend like that isn't exactly what you tried to deny even happened. Total goalpost switch. You asked to be proven wrong by a quote. You were proven wrong by a quote. End of story. Just admit you were wrong and move on.

LM provided a quote showing Trump said some people crossing the border illegally are rapists and you (and the media) changed it to Mexicans are rapists, thats moving the goalpost.

Trump didn't say that some Mexicans crossing the borders were rapists. He was actually saying something different. The fact that 'some Mexicans are rapists' is incidental to the actual message.

Here's Trump's quote:

“When do we beat Mexico at the border? They’re laughing at us, at our stupidity. […] When Mexico sends its people they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you; they’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists, and some, I assume, are good people. But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we’re getting.”

http://www.newstandardpress.com/trump-mexicans-and-the-media/

I suggest reading his analysis

"Mexico is sending ... their rapists", is what he's saying.

Thats a different complaint, but here's what Hillary said about Mexico back in '06

“Mexico is such an important problem on our doorstep. … the Mexican government’s policies are pushing migration north across our border! … There isn’t any sensible approach except to do what we need to do simultaneously: secure our borders, technology, personnel, physical barriers if necessary at some places… If they’ve committed transgressions of whatever kind, they should be obviously deported.

Castro unloaded his jails and dumped criminals into Florida as depicted in the movie Scarface. Mexico facilitates the movement of criminals into the USA, thats in their interest and we try to stop it, thats in our interest.

the question is whether indeed it’s true that the Mexican government actually pushes or sends some people into the U.S. In fact, the Mexican government did produce materials and services to assist immigrants to enter the U.S., even without U.S. authorization.

Berzerker also still thinks the charlottesville rally wasn't full of neo-nazis and white supremacist, but unfortunately for him reality does not comport with said belief.

We all have our realities

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/15/charlottesville-militia-free-speech-violence

Yours does not comport with theirs, I'll trust them.

 

[Lexicus]

I'm not talking about institutional power, I'm talking about literally just rigging the election, the same kind of operation that leads a guy like Maduro to get 99% of the vote in Venezuela. Would you put it past the GOP in the age of Trump? Because I sure wouldn't.

 

[rah]

The GOP has, hitherto, exercised relative restraint in its electoral shenanigans. I would say the election in Georgia last year, where the GOP candidate was also actually in charge of overseeing the election, may have crossed the line. But I don't think we can trust the states under GOP control not to just rig the ballots for Trump. As El_Mach has noted if Trump looks like losing he can always declare the election illegitimate due to illegal voting - do you really believe the GOP would be suddenly come to its senses if he did so? I don't.

People were saying the same thing about the mid terms and the dems still took over the house.
The states that are so far up Trumps ass to be in a position to rig the ballots for Trump are going to be won by him anyway. Georgia and Alabama will not win it for trump. Beto came close in Texas. Texas is probably all it takes for Trump to Lose (I still don't think that this time, but maybe in 2024)

 

[Cloud_Strife]

We all have our realities

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/15/charlottesville-militia-free-speech-violence

Yours does not comport with theirs, I'll trust them over you.

I do not believe these militia's to be good faith actors, but the point is i could show you any number of videos or pictures that directly contradict your beliefs but that doesn't matter, the fact's don't matter to you, you have your narrative and you will double down just as you have done so before.

 

[Lexicus]

People were saying the same thing about the mid terms and the dems still took over the house.

That's true. But their control of the House hasn't really done much to hinder Trump's agenda, or so it seems. taking Trump himself out of the White House is quite a different story.

The states that are so far up Trumps ass to be in a position to rig the ballots for Trump are going to be won by him anyway.

Yes, this may be a reason for optimism. Fair point.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

Still waiting on those principled Republicans to start actually resisting against trump, beyond just mealy mouthed words.

 

[Lexicus]

Still waiting on those principled Republicans to start actually resisting against trump, beyond just mealy mouthed words.

To be fair there have been like one, or two

 

[rah]

That's generous. But they fold in the gentlest breeze

 

[Lexicus]

Yours does not comport with theirs, I'll trust them.

Um, actually, it sounds exactly like that guy is saying that rally was full of white supremacists and nazis...even if he is trying to distance himself from them...

 

[Lexicus]

That's generous. But they fold in the gentlest breeze

Justin Amash is one dude I have grudging respect for even though I loathe his politics.

 

[rah]

That's true. But their control of the House hasn't really done much to hinder Trump's agenda, or so it seems. taking Trump himself out of the White House is quite a different story.

Incumbents have such a natural advantage that I fear you are correct. But just like there was a model that showed Trump winning in 2016 there's one that shows him losing in 2020, so I refuse to give up hope.

 

[Lexicus]

Incumbents have such a natural advantage that I fear you are correct. But just like there was a model that showed Trump winning in 2016 there's one that shows him losing in 2020, so I refuse to give up hope.

What has to happen in this model, out of curiosity?

 

[rah]

One of them has Texas, (but that one is really low probo) the other is Wisconsin Michigan and Pennsylvania. That's why I keep harping on choosing a candidate that will win in these states regardless of it's a schmuck. Heck I'd even settle for Oprah.

 

[Lexicus]

I think WI, MI and PA are plausible. Texas, not so much. Assuming I don't go back to school before the election I'd guess the ol' union will be sending me to one of those three states to canvass the election.

 

[rah]

They're predicting Texas to turn white minority by 2022. It's going to get harder and harder to hold down that vote.
California used to be a Republican stronghold. Texas is next. But we may be just a couple of years early for that, but one model shows it in 2020.