Zorral Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/17/us/politics/trump-reelection-campaign-kickoff.html The word, 'fluke' is employed within, with great doubt this is a fluke, though, indeed. fishy Quote For Mr. Trump himself, the next year and a half will be a chance to prove that he was not just an aberration who managed to slide into office with an Electoral College victory even though nearly three million more voters cast ballots for the other candidate. Ever since taking the oath, Mr. Trump has been sensitive to perceived attacks on his legitimacy, especially the investigations into Russia’s role in helping to elect him. Nothing would do more to validate that legitimacy than winning a second term. He starts from a stronger position in many ways than that day in 2015, fully in command of the advantages of incumbency — the gushing fund-raising spigot, the unparalleled media bullhorn, the tools of government to reward or punish, the big plane with “United States of America” stenciled on its side conveying power and respect. And he has firmly seized control of his party in a way that was almost unimaginable in 2016 when Republican elders plotted ways to take the nomination away from him at the convention, then later urged him to drop out just weeks before the November election on the assumption that he would crash and burn. The Never Trumpers have since faded, the dissenters purged. While elected Republicans push back from time to time, they have largely fallen in line when it really counted. The only challenger to Mr. Trump for his party’s nomination, former Gov. William F. Weld of Massachusetts, poses no evident threat. From the beginning the indications were there that once squatted he planned on never leaving, no matter what. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/17/us/politics/on-politics-trump-reelection-2020.html Quote Those efforts have helped Mr. Trump’s team more than triple the list of 10 million voter contacts his operation had at the end of the 2016 election. By Election Day, they expect to have at least 50 million, a number awfully close to the 62 million that voted for Mr. Trump in 2016. Those phone numbers and email addresses allow the campaign to reach their supporters immediately.... All of this early growth is possible because his operation is exceedingly well-funded, a consequence of Mr. Trump taking the unprecedented step of filing his re-election campaign the day of his inauguration. His campaign had $40 million in the bank as of the last fund-raising report, with a goal of raising $1 billion for the 2020 race. (By comparison, President Barack Obama held less than $2 million in the bank at this point in his re-election cycle.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 24 minutes ago, Zorral said: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/17/us/politics/trump-reelection-campaign-kickoff.html The word, 'fluke' is employed within, with great doubt this is a fluke, though, indeed. fishy From the beginning the indications were there that once squatted he planned on never leaving, no matter what. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/17/us/politics/on-politics-trump-reelection-2020.html If Trump loses in November 2020 and attempts to remain in office after the expiration of his term in January 2021 it really will be a shit fight. We will find out who in the US Military takes their oath to the US Constitution seriously and who worships at the steps of cults of personality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 14 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: If Trump loses in November 2020 and attempts to remain in office after the expiration of his term in January 2021 it really will be a shit fight. We will find out who in the US Military takes their oath to the US Constitution seriously and who worships at the steps of cults of personality. I really don't see it being so dramatic. I can't see the military backing someone who was voted out of office. The MIC thrives on stability* and there so so much money at stake, no way this becomes a real situation. Wouldn't be surprised if he makes some statements about how he wants to stay but I really doubt this scenario ever plays out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darzin Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 I think you can advocate for less immigration without being a racist, and ultimately we do need some controls on immigration so you're always going to have migrants detained in places. I think the Democrats have gone a little bit nuts on immigration frankly, not the politicians but the base large portions of them are comparing these migrant detention camps to concentration camps ect. And are defacto arguing for open borders and ignoring the fact Obama had camps and the next Democratic president will as well part of running a country is controlling who enters it Trump is a cruel racist that doesn't mean borders are racist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 5 minutes ago, larrytheimp said: I really don't see it being so dramatic. I can't see the military backing someone who was voted out of office. The MIC thrives on stability* and there so so much money at stake, no way this becomes a real situation. Wouldn't be surprised if he makes some statements about how he wants to stay but I really doubt this scenario ever plays out I agree. That said, Trump’s popularity among Police and the Military makes me, uncomfortable. Also, he will create some paper thin BS to justify remaining in office that the Trumpanistas will all eat up like the lapdogs they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 5 minutes ago, larrytheimp said: I really don't see it being so dramatic. I can't see the military backing someone who was voted out of office. The MIC thrives on stability* and there so so much money at stake, no way this becomes a real situation. Wouldn't be surprised if he makes some statements about how he wants to stay but I really doubt this scenario ever plays out But no defeat of Trump is ever legitimate. If he loses in 2020, it will be because of millions of illegal voters. He'll have three months to rant from November to January about it. I am not nearly as confident as you that conservatives in the military can't convince themselves that America is under siege and "protecting America" means going along with Trump's coup. Not that it's 100% or anything, but it's definitely on the table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 57 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: If Trump loses in November 2020 and attempts to remain in office after the expiration of his term in January 2021 it really will be a shit fight. We will find out who in the US Military takes their oath to the US Constitution seriously and who worships at the steps of cults of personality. 42 minutes ago, larrytheimp said: I really don't see it being so dramatic. I can't see the military backing someone who was voted out of office. The MIC thrives on stability* and there so so much money at stake, no way this becomes a real situation. Wouldn't be surprised if he makes some statements about how he wants to stay but I really doubt this scenario ever plays out 31 minutes ago, Maithanet said: But no defeat of Trump is ever legitimate. If he loses in 2020, it will be because of millions of illegal voters. He'll have three months to rant from November to January about it. I am not nearly as confident as you that conservatives in the military can't convince themselves that America is under siege and "protecting America" means going along with Trump's coup. Not that it's 100% or anything, but it's definitely on the table. I fall closer to Maith on this one. My personal hunch is that Russia is gonna throw everything at the wall and see what happens next year because Putin has started to distance himself from his crusty sock puppet. And when that happens Trump will blame Democrats for any voting irregularities he and Mitch refused to be proactive about. But I'm sure THIS time, Republicans would stop him. Don't forget to reference that one SCOTUS decision if you wanna make that argument though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 18 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said: I fall closer to Maith on this one. My personal hunch is that Russia is gonna throw everything at the wall and see what happens next year because Putin has started to distance himself from his crusty sock puppet. And when that happens Trump will blame Democrats for any voting irregularities he and Mitch refused to be proactive about. But I'm sure THIS time, Republicans would stop him. Don't forget to reference that one SCOTUS decision if you wanna make that argument though. Jace, I don’t think the SCOTUS is as bent as you seem to believe and I see the recent holding re Gerrymandering and Double Jeopardy as evidence that it isn’t bent. That said the SCOTUS is extremely limited as to what it can and can’t do and I don’t believe it is the branch best equipped to stop an attempt at Executive Branch overreach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Darzin said: I think you can advocate for less immigration without being a racist, and ultimately we do need some controls on immigration so you're always going to have migrants detained in places. I think the Democrats have gone a little bit nuts on immigration frankly, not the politicians but the base large portions of them are comparing these migrant detention camps to concentration camps ect. And are defacto arguing for open borders and ignoring the fact Obama had camps and the next Democratic president will as well part of running a country is controlling who enters it Trump is a cruel racist that doesn't mean borders are racist. I don’t think I’ve seen any credible person argue for this, and I’ve seen very people in general support this point of view. All people have said is treat the immigrants at the border with more respect and not separate families and throw kids in cages. Not a hard ask IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: I agree. That said, Trump’s popularity among Police and the Military makes me, uncomfortable. Also, he will create some paper thin BS to justify remaining in office that the Trumpanistas will all eat up like the lapdogs they are. First, it’s worth noting that Neo-Nazi groups and their like have spent the last three decades infiltrating the military and law enforcement. Given their love for Trump, I think it’s at least feasibly possible that some would defend him. Second, if we really do go down that road, it won’t be because Trump refuses to leave office after the election. There simply won’t be an election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: First, it’s worth noting that Neo-Nazi groups and their like have spent the last three decades infiltrating the military and law enforcement. Given their love for Trump, I think it’s at least feasibly possible that some would defend him. Second, if we really do go down that road, it won’t be because Trump refuses to leave office after the election. There simply won’t be an election. I disagree. Refusing to hold an election is too open. Even Trump needs some claim to justify his holding onto power. An election and all the BS claims he can gin up from that provides him with cover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 20 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: I disagree. Refusing to hold an election is too open. Even Trump needs some claim to justify his holding onto power. An election and all the BS claims he can gin up from that provides him with cover. Scot, you and I were literally just talking about the Gulf of Tonkin last week. All Trump needs is a justification to declare a national emergency that requires Marshal Law. Americans crave security, even when it’s nonsensical. I think they could stomach that more than an obvious sham election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Scot, you and I were literally just talking about the Gulf of Tonkin last week. All Trump needs is a justification to declare a national emergency that requires Marshal Law. Americans crave security, even when it’s nonsensical. I think they could stomach that more than an obvious sham election. I think just calling off the election is too obvious (and obviously unconstitutional). By the way it’s “Martial Law”, not “Marshal Law”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 11 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: I think just calling off the election is too obvious (and obviously unconstitutional). By the way it’s “Martial Law”, not “Marshal Law”. HE WASN'T REAAAAAAAAAADYYYYYY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 18 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: I think just calling off the election is too obvious (and obviously unconstitutional). By the way it’s “Martial Law”, not “Marshal Law”. How dare you! Nobody makes me bleed my own blood! Jokes aside, this business with Iran will be telling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 18 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: How dare you! Nobody makes me bleed my own blood! Jokes aside, this business with Iran will be telling. Agreed. What is bizarre is that the US military as it stands, simply isn’t large enough to take on Iran one on one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: I disagree. Refusing to hold an election is too open. Even Trump needs some claim to justify his holding onto power. An election and all the BS claims he can gin up from that provides him with cover. Exactly. Think of all those tyrannies that hold elections -- with a single candidate. They perceive that even they need this travesty of legitimacy. As in election of 1933 in Germany. (I say this, knowing full well that's how Cuba's elections for president operated for a very long time -- doing so even prior to Fidel.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dornishpen Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 2 hours ago, Darzin said: I think you can advocate for less immigration without being a racist, and ultimately we do need some controls on immigration so you're always going to have migrants detained in places. I think the Democrats have gone a little bit nuts on immigration frankly, not the politicians but the base large portions of them are comparing these migrant detention camps to concentration camps ect. And are defacto arguing for open borders and ignoring the fact Obama had camps and the next Democratic president will as well part of running a country is controlling who enters it Trump is a cruel racist that doesn't mean borders are racist. They're certainly not equal to the worst historical examples, but the migrant detention camps near the US-Mexico border easily meet the definition of a concentration camp: "a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities", Obama also having them does not in any way make it ok. This isn't the first time the United States has had concentration camps and I'm sure it will not be the last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 16 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Agreed. What is bizarre is that the US military as it stands, simply isn’t large enough to take on Iran one on one. Eh... Wars don't hinge on massive ground forces anymore. If they did then the Allies woulda been in real trouble during the 2nd Ardennes. The U.S. Navy has fucking rail guns. They've just never had anything to shoot them at before. And MOAB's. We have fucking MOAB's. Do you know what that does? It sets the goddamn air on fire. Pompeo and Bolton probably jerk off to the thought of using those on a 'justifiable' military target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 21 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Agreed. What is bizarre is that the US military as it stands, simply isn’t large enough to take on Iran one on one. The US doesn't even have a Secretary of Defense! As of this moment, not even an 'acting' SOD. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/acting-defense-secretary-patrick-shanahan-will-step-down-acting-post-n1018921 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.