2020 US Election (Part Two)

Status
Not open for further replies.
The GOP is happy to support a Ben Carson or... the crazy Alaska lady who's name escapes me.

Ben Carson is the exception that proves the rule. Trump always had one or two people of color behind him at his rallies. See he loves people of color!

You forgot about Alan Keyes, Tim Scott, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, and the recently deceased Herman Cain. All prominent Black Republicans. And not Reconstruction ones...
 
Yes, like Narz said, "a" Ben Carson. Not only Ben Carson.
 
Partial quotes FTW

That's how American "news media," makes quotes, so it must be acceptable and par for the course in discussing U.S. politics. Americans would likely find the news on the BBC and the CBC would put them to sleep without constant sensationalist yellow journalism, carefully cropped incendiary tidbits of quotes by politicians and celebrities to make them as good or bad as the "news," show wants them to, and odious and highly partisan "experts," weighing in on ulterior motive laden "panels."
 
How does an exception prove a rule?

The proverb the exception that proves the rule is often used to justify something that seems to contradict a rule. However, the term the exception that proves the rule actually means this exception, under these parameters, proves that the rule works in all other circumstances. In this case, the word proves is used in a semi-scientific sense to mean test. For instance, if a sign at a bakery states “Doughnuts available Sunday morning”, this is the exception that proves the rule that doughnuts are not available at the bakery at any other time. The term the exception that proves the rule is derived from a Latin phrase first used by Cicero, exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis, which means the exception confirms the rule in cases not excepted.

"The exception that proves the rule" (sometimes "the exception proves the rule") is a saying whose meaning is contested. Henry Watson Fowler's Modern English Usage identifies five ways in which the phrase has been used,[1] and each use makes some sort of reference to the role that a particular case or event takes in relation to a more general rule.

Two original meanings of the phrase are usually cited. The first, preferred by Fowler, is that the presence of an exception applying to a specific case establishes ("proves") that a general rule exists. A more explicit phrasing might be "the exception that proves the existence of the rule."[1] Most contemporary uses of the phrase emerge from this origin,[2] although often in a way which is closer to the idea that all rules have their exceptions.[1] The alternative origin given is that the word "prove" is used in the archaic sense of "test".[3] In this sense, the phrase does not mean that an exception demonstrates a rule to be true or to exist, but that it tests the rule, thereby proving its value. There is little evidence of the phrase being used in this second way.
 
I've folks in my family whose last name is "Butts", yes that's right. It's actually a pretty common southern last name in the US. No idea why, but I can see why she wanted to hyphenate and keep the "Lance" if her marriage would have made her name "Bottoms". I can also see that if her maiden name was actually "Bottoms" that she might want to keep it, given the stories I've heard from relatives about how much crap they took for being named "Butts". That kind of thing can potentially entrench you into the name, and make you reluctant to give it up, sort of feeling like you are giving in to the hecklers.
The UK has a politician called ‘Ed Balls’.
 
You forgot about Alan Keyes,
This struck me as funny, as the only thing I know about Alan Keyes is that when he was the Republican candidate for the Senate in 2004 in Illinois, the Republican party was running ads against him.
 
Kanye West's bid for the presidency is apparently being funded and organized by lawyers who work for the Trump campaign. They got him on the ballot in Wisconsin.
 
And there's no doubt the Trumpsters are responsible for West's latest relapse and mental break down and the subsequent public shaming and humiliation of his own wife and children.

The "pro family party" lol
 
Hm, so Kanye is playing the role of Farage? Can one only run in some select states? (Farage did so in the last british election, just to take votes from Labour)

I really doubt that many people would vote for that clown, though.
 
One side quietly supporting a bad candidate for the other side? Inconceivable!

(the link is to a Politico article noting a Dem super-PAC was pushing that pinnacle of humanity Kris Kobach in Kansas' US Senate GOP primary)
 
Kanye West's bid for the presidency is apparently being funded and organized by lawyers who work for the Trump campaign. They got him on the ballot in Wisconsin.

I was going to say "who's Kayne West", but then remembered it was some black musician who seemed to like Trump very much. So I have to wonder: its this serious at all? Because if it is then it would be an attempt at drawing votes that might go to Biden but not Trump.

Someone took their time finding the obvious... :lol:
 
This just popped into my head.

Do you know who is effectively going to determine the outcome of the 2020 election?

Spoiler :
Fox News


Spoiler :
On election night, they will have to determine (will have had to determine in advance, actually) whether they are going to act like a news-reporting source or enable Trump. The very, very strong bias for news organizations on election night is to "call" states as early as they can. That's what people are tuning in for on election night. News networks have developed systems for letting them make those calls. Until they can, they label particular states "too early to call" or "too close to call." But the second they can, they call. It Fox wants to enable the strategy that Trump has been preparing ("It's all so chaotic, how could anyone possibly know?"), they will have to purposefully, deliberately and aggressively override the baseline mechanics of election-night reporting. If they were to do that on his behalf, it would give him the argument, "well, only the fake news networks have called for Biden; another network says it's not settled." But were they to do that: 1) it would be obvious what they were up to and 2) they would sacrifice the credibility of their news wing forever.

When Fox News reports it called for Biden, then it's effectively settled; then there's just Trump's grousing. There'll be tons of grousing, and the commentary wing of Fox will give him every platform for his grousing. But the election will be determined.
 
Last edited:
I don’t follow how that would change the outcome.

If it does, I’m going to preempt Fox and CNN and declare myself the winner. All fifty states, too.
 
It will neuter Trump's strategy for challenging the outcome. And thus, effectively, settle the election.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom