Jump to content

The Next President is...


disgruntledemployee

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Biden administration to remove terrorist designation for Yemen's Houthi militia

Iran jumping for joy...I don't understand this decision especially when we have been supplying arms to Saudi (until Biden suspended sales to them.), to help them push back this group which has clear demonstrated ties to the Iranian and North Korean governments.

Because Trump said they were terrorists, so Biden has to say they are not.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Prosuper said:

Wordy article from Time admitting that Trump was right about the election.  https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

This really ended up being about everyone except Trump (and Trump supporters), miraculously saving the election.  And boy was it close (so they said)...

Quote

This is the inside story of the conspiracy to save the 2020 election, based on access to the group’s inner workings, never-before-seen documents and interviews with dozens of those involved from across the political spectrum. It is the story of an unprecedented, creative and determined campaign whose success also reveals how close the nation came to disaster.

The inferred meaning here is - a Trump win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The inferred meaning here is - a Trump win.
I took the implied meaning as an election whose results were declared invalid. That outcome would be by far much worse than a "Trump win." Dems and many on the left seem to think this would've been the worst election outcome, but it's not; an election being tampered with is the worst outcome, regardless of who won.

I don't think we have any real precedence on what to do if the presidential election was declared invalid, especially if it was declared invalid late (like in December or January, since lawsuits take time).

Does the incumbent stay in power? Do they (president and VP) step down while the election is redone, and have the speaker of the house fill in until it's certified? Though the latter doesn't make sense either because they would've also been on the same ballot as a representative, so would also be declared invalid. So it wipes out the House as well. I guess you'd still have 2/3 of the Senate.

And leading up to that, how would communities redo the election to avoid being tampered with a second time in a relevant time period? How does mail in or absentee voting work if you're trying to redo the election quickly? Or do military members and dependents overseas just lose their right to vote for an election? That can also sway a redo election.

Finally, it would destroy our moral credibility in international politics if we can't hold open and fair elections, especially when we have held ourselves up as the champions of democracy. So we'd also lose at least some of our ability to influence other nations based on our ideology. I'm sure China or Russia would be more than happy to use our failed election to increase their influence in the world.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2021 at 6:42 AM, brabus said:

The irony is for the amount of black people you’ve talked to who support your viewpoint, I have 7 (yes I’ve counted when I thought about it) black friends who do not share your viewpoint (and 3 of them came to this country on a raft as a child...so no, they’re not from a “privileged” family). They are along the thought process espoused earlier in this thread that historical treatment and past laws have been terrible/discriminatory, and there are absolutely things to address and make better today, but there is not a systemic, nation-wide, far-reaching (or whatever other adjective you want to use) problem of racism. It is real and they want it gone, but it is so wildly blown out of proportion when attached to words like “systemic” and the focus of those who are well intentioned is significantly misguided.

So consider this, or just throw it away because it’s counter to the narrative, but I hope you guys don’t, because it’s certainly a perspective that needs to be considered so we can move forward in the most positive direction, without being misguided so strongly by bullshit spewed by the media and politicians.

Thanks for sharing what you've learned.  It doesn't match my insights, but that's fine.  There is BS on both sides.  Gone are the days of the solely-"liberal mainstream media".  Mainstream media now has two components:  The MSNBC/CNN/NYT side and the Fox/OAN/talk radio side.  Both have large viewer/readerships.

With regard to: "...there are absolutely things to address and make better today..."   What are those things?  How should they be addressed and made better today? 

Edited by Swamp Yankee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2021 at 3:00 PM, pawnman said:

Because Trump said they were terrorists, so Biden has to say they are not.

 

On 2/6/2021 at 11:18 AM, ClearedHot said:

Biden administration to remove terrorist designation for Yemen's Houthi militia

Iran jumping for joy...I don't understand this decision especially when we have been supplying arms to Saudi (until Biden suspended sales to them.), to help them push back this group which has clear demonstrated ties to the Iranian and North Korean governments.

The Houthis (Ansar Allah) are a terrorist organization by any definition.  However, this development is more about the Trump admin scoring political points on their way out. 

Trump did not declare Houthis a terrorist organization until 10 Jan 2021. By waiting until their final few days, the Republicans could avoid foreign policy conflicts while making Biden look bad when he inevitably reversed this last-minute designation.   Mission accomplished in that regard.   

The humanitarian aid concerns are real, although Trump likely did not designate earlier because Houthis are in conflict with ISIS / ISIL / AQAP (the enemy of my enemy is my friend concept).   To their credit, in 2018 the Trump admin designated IRGC and QF (Iran) as terrorist orgs partially because they supply the Houthis with arms.  Biden's admin has not reversed that yet.  We will have to see what new Sec State Blinken does.  What we do with Iran is far more important than specifically the Houthis. Iran sees itself as a major world power and wants to be treated as such.  The question is where on the 3-axis spectrum of sanctions / military posturing / diplomacy we should be.  In my opinion we need to get tougher. 

This links below provide some interesting analysis:

https://www.aei.org/op-eds/biden-is-hoping-to-deal-with-an-iran-that-doesnt-exist/

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/02/05/biden-nuclear-iran-foreign-policy-466120

Edited by Swamp Yankee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2021 at 6:49 PM, jazzdude said:

I took the implied meaning as an election whose results were declared invalid. That outcome would be by far much worse than a "Trump win." Dems and many on the left seem to think this would've been the worst election outcome, but it's not; an election being tampered with is the worst outcome, regardless of who won.

I don't think we have any real precedence on what to do if the presidential election was declared invalid, especially if it was declared invalid late (like in December or January, since lawsuits take time).

Does the incumbent stay in power? Do they (president and VP) step down while the election is redone, and have the speaker of the house fill in until it's certified? Though the latter doesn't make sense either because they would've also been on the same ballot as a representative, so would also be declared invalid. So it wipes out the House as well. I guess you'd still have 2/3 of the Senate.

And leading up to that, how would communities redo the election to avoid being tampered with a second time in a relevant time period? How does mail in or absentee voting work if you're trying to redo the election quickly? Or do military members and dependents overseas just lose their right to vote for an election? That can also sway a redo election.

Finally, it would destroy our moral credibility in international politics if we can't hold open and fair elections, especially when we have held ourselves up as the champions of democracy. So we'd also lose at least some of our ability to influence other nations based on our ideology. I'm sure China or Russia would be more than happy to use our failed election to increase their influence in the world.

I agree.  If Trump was legitimately reelected many would have been disappointed, but the country would survive.

However, we barely missed suffering the 2nd worst outcome; a "strongman" leader forcing their continuance.  Past examples include Lukashenko in Belarus, Morales in Bolivia,  and Hernandez in Honduras. Not exactly shining examples of free-market economies with significant personal liberty.   We dodged that bullet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Swamp Yankee said:

I agree.  If Trump was legitimately reelected many would have been disappointed, but the country would survive.

However, we barely missed suffering the 2nd worst outcome; a "strongman" leader forcing their continuance.  Past examples include Lukashenko in Belarus, Morales in Bolivia,  and Hernandez in Honduras. Not exactly shining examples of free-market economies with significant personal liberty.   We dodged that bullet. 

Barely missed? His own vice president shot him down. He lost in every court his legal team entered. It's amazing how we always seem to be on the precipice of catastrophe, yet never fall over the edge. Perhaps we're not as close as our emotions, and political puppeteers, lead us to believe.

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/7/2021 at 12:46 AM, Prosuper said:

Wordy article from Time admitting that Trump was right about the election.  https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

Just got around to reading that article.  Lengthy for sure but well worth the read.  I’ve never agreed with the folks out there who claim widespread voter fraud, voting machine manipulation and the other various conspiracy theories.  I voted for Trump and I recognize that he lost but not for those reasons.  I do believe there was a calculated effort to defeat him using a combination of the main stream media, big tech, social media, Hollywood, unions, big business and the dem party.  This article details those coordinated efforts.  They held nothing back and they won.  The playbook they used in the election is really no different at all in their everyday push to move progressive issues forward.  It’s exactly what frustrates and disenfranchises conservatives every single day.  

You have to give the dems credit.  They never take their foot off the gas.  

Edited by lloyd christmas
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barely missed? His own vice president shot him down. He lost in every court his legal team entered. It's amazing how we always seem to be on the precipice of catastrophe, yet never fall over the edge. Perhaps we're not as close as our emotions, and political puppeteers, lead us to believe.


I agree it wasn't a "barely missed," but it shows some significant assumptions in our elections that need to be (or continue to be) addressed.

We were arguably much closer to a "bad" election back in 2000 with the Florida recounts. Though some good came out of that, with an emphasis on better voting systems that helped prevent a repeat of that on a potential larger scale in 2020. Could you imagine the debate on hanging chads in 2020 instead of having electronic and paper records of votes?

What Trump attempted to do was attack elections in key states, and hope something would stick. If a few stuck, it opens up the (unlikely) chance even more elections are bad, and casts doubt on the election. Fortunately, his campaign didn't have a lot of funding to sustain a legal fight (don't have to win, but just have to keep it in court), and the places they challenged had improved their voting systems to fend off spurious lawsuits.

Hell, a politician doesn't even have to win in court; they just have to fuel enough discontent and doubt in their base for them to take action, maybe drastically. Trump arguably inspired (or convinced, depending on your political leaning) a bunch of people to storm the Capitol to stop the election certification. Fortunately, those people were just idiots and loosely organized, and didn't appear to really be executing a coup. It could've been a lot worse had there been a concerted effort to attack senators or representatives.

So yeah, we're not at the precipice of catastrophe, but that doesn't mean everything is okay. Many of the Trump claims were refuted due to investments in improved voting technologies, but that's not a static fight. A bunch of fired up citizens stormed the Capitol when Congress was in session and had control of the building, if only for a short while.

We need to continue to improve our election security, to include ballots (paper, electronic, absentee), voter registration, voter verification, and election certification and certification.

There's also some ugliness in our system that needs to be addressed, such as gerrymandering. ("Both parties do it" is an insufficient/inadequate answer)

We also need to address the "what if" of having a bad election, since right now it looks like the assumption is "it's not likely so we don't have a rule for it." Not an immediately pressing issue, but an important one. We already added one amendment to handle Presidential succession, so I don't think it's far fetched to address what happens with a invalid election (not just to address political shenanigans, but also for natural or man made disasters on election day).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Swamp Yankee said:

 

The Houthis (Ansar Allah) are a terrorist organization by any definition.  However, this development is more about the Trump admin scoring political points on their way out. 

Trump did not declare Houthis a terrorist organization until 10 Jan 2021. By waiting until their final few days, the Republicans could avoid foreign policy conflicts while making Biden look bad when he inevitably reversed this last-minute designation.   Mission accomplished in that regard.   

The humanitarian aid concerns are real, although Trump likely did not designate earlier because Houthis are in conflict with ISIS / ISIL / AQAP (the enemy of my enemy is my friend concept).   To their credit, in 2018 the Trump admin designated IRGC and QF (Iran) as terrorist orgs partially because they supply the Houthis with arms.  Biden's admin has not reversed that yet.  We will have to see what new Sec State Blinken does.  What we do with Iran is far more important than specifically the Houthis. Iran sees itself as a major world power and wants to be treated as such.  The question is where on the 3-axis spectrum of sanctions / military posturing / diplomacy we should be.  In my opinion we need to get tougher. 

This links below provide some interesting analysis:

https://www.aei.org/op-eds/biden-is-hoping-to-deal-with-an-iran-that-doesnt-exist/

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/02/05/biden-nuclear-iran-foreign-policy-466120

Having served as the TF commander in Africa...I understand exactly what and who they are. 

There are other reasons they were not previously designated..even though many of us in the field asked for it.  I have heard the cover story about getting aid and other help in but it doesn't not reality or the situation on the ground.  Bottomline, these clowns are a proxy for Iran and as Trump elevated his fight against Iran we should have kept the pressure on.  When it comes to Biden I have zero faith after he and his boss send an airplane load of American Pesos to the Iranian government.  This was a big mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2021 at 3:46 PM, Prosuper said:

Wordy article from Time admitting that Trump was right about the election.  https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

I have read this many times, my own conclusion is that the elites more or less think the American people are morons . So they think for the greater good, their good not ours, to save the country at all costs from the morons. We are much too stupid to decide for ourselves. Unfortunately now we now have half the population who thinks Joe Biden is a stooge for the elites and have a amoral  VP who gave sexual favors to get her start in politics a heart beat away from being #47. 

 

Edited by Prosuper
content
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So...what do we think this will do to Biden support among the teachers unions? 
Biden calls closed schools a "national emergency "
 
Well, we're about to find out if Biden believes in an events based timeline, or a campaign promise schedule based timeline.

I think any loss of support from teachers unions will be more than made up from elsewhere. Plus, it's not like the Republicans will treat the teachers unions any better after the next election anyways.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Barely missed? His own vice president shot him down. He lost in every court his legal team entered. It's amazing how we always seem to be on the precipice of catastrophe, yet never fall over the edge. Perhaps we're not as close as our emotions, and political puppeteers, lead us to believe.

You don't think having an armed mob storm the capitol to interfere with the certification of a democratic election counts as "falling over the edge?"  Something tells me if it was antifa who did it, you would. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The honeymoon is over Joe, now you have to answer to your communist base.  This week the far left is holding Joe's feet to the fire on such wonderful issues as:

1.  $15 minimum wage which will crush already struggling small businesses and cost a CBO estimated 1.4 Million jobs.

2.  Government payments to Illegals...WTF!

3.  Bernie openly bashing what your cohorts in Congress have proposed for stimulus eligibility.

 

742672240_ScreenShot2021-02-09at5_04_36AM.thumb.png.cf07e5fdb8db3c8cedb2e24b67796575.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Pooter said:

You don't think having an armed mob storm the capitol to interfere with the certification of a democratic election counts as "falling over the edge?"  Something tells me if it was antifa who did it, you would. 
 

No, I sure don't. And I've never once claimed that Antifa had us close to collapse. Nor the race riots. 

 

Anyone who claims we are close to the edge for *any* reason is simply wrong. There were no tanks rolling on the capitol, no politicians arrested, no process undone. Congress was back in session in a matter of hours.

 

Despite the fact that our political betters have convinced most of their constituencies that the other half of the country is a threat to their existence, it's never been a better time to be alive, and that applies to all demographics. 

 

The false depiction of a looming apocalypse is exactly the fear mongering tactic politicians are using to generate donations and votes. The side effect of it's making us hate our neighbors. Long term it may be a self fulfilling prophecy, but in the short term we are nowhere close to catastrophe.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

Anyone who claims we are close to the edge for *any* reason is simply wrong. There were no tanks rolling on the capitol, no politicians arrested, no process undone.

In fairness, these things describe a system that has fallen off the edge, not inched near it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/8/2021 at 5:15 PM, ClearedHot said:

Having served as the TF commander in Africa...I understand exactly what and who they are. 

There are other reasons they were not previously designated..even though many of us in the field asked for it.  I have heard the cover story about getting aid and other help in but it doesn't not reality or the situation on the ground.  Bottomline, these clowns are a proxy for Iran and as Trump elevated his fight against Iran we should have kept the pressure on.  When it comes to Biden I have zero faith after he and his boss send an airplane load of American Pesos to the Iranian government.  This was a big mistake.

I gave you the actual reason for the late designation, which wasn't the impact on aid distribution.  How much it affected our efforts against ISIS is unclear.  With regard to Iran, paying the $1.3b interest on a 1979 $400m FMS refund was an especially wimp move on Obama's part, although the original MoU did stipulate freezing the funds in an interest-bearing account. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

No, I sure don't. And I've never once claimed that Antifa had us close to collapse. Nor the race riots. 

 

Anyone who claims we are close to the edge for *any* reason is simply wrong. There were no tanks rolling on the capitol, no politicians arrested, no process undone. Congress was back in session in a matter of hours.

 

Despite the fact that our political betters have convinced most of their constituencies that the other half of the country is a threat to their existence, it's never been a better time to be alive, and that applies to all demographics. 

 

The false depiction of a looming apocalypse is exactly the fear mongering tactic politicians are using to generate donations and votes. The side effect of it's making us hate our neighbors. Long term it may be a self fulfilling prophecy, but in the short term we are nowhere close to catastrophe.

 

1 hour ago, Homestar said:

In fairness, these things describe a system that has fallen off the edge, not inched near it.

Agreed. 

 

2 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

No, I sure don't. And I've never once claimed that Antifa had us close to collapse. Nor the race riots. 

 

Anyone who claims we are close to the edge for *any* reason is simply wrong. There were no tanks rolling on the capitol, no politicians arrested, no process undone. Congress was back in session in a matter of hours.

 

Despite the fact that our political betters have convinced most of their constituencies that the other half of the country is a threat to their existence, it's never been a better time to be alive, and that applies to all demographics. 

 

The false depiction of a looming apocalypse is exactly the fear mongering tactic politicians are using to generate donations and votes. The side effect of it's making us hate our neighbors. Long term it may be a self fulfilling prophecy, but in the short term we are nowhere close to catastrophe.

"There were no tanks rolling on the capitol, no politicians arrested, no process undone. Congress was back in session in a matter of hours."

As homestar noted, these things are indicative of being over the edge, to keep our vernacular consistent.  That in mind, what are other indications of imminent chaos?  What would have actually concerned you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

The honeymoon is over Joe, now you have to answer to your communist base.  This week the far left is holding Joe's feet to the fire on such wonderful issues as:

1.  $15 minimum wage which will crush already struggling small businesses and cost a CBO estimated 1.4 Million jobs.

2.  Government payments to Illegals...WTF!

3.  Bernie openly bashing what your cohorts in Congress have proposed for stimulus eligibility.

 

742672240_ScreenShot2021-02-09at5_04_36AM.thumb.png.cf07e5fdb8db3c8cedb2e24b67796575.png

The income cap reduction is being championed by Joe Manchin, who is considered one of the most conservative democrats in the Senate.  In AOC's NYC, $150k family is barely middle-class.  Bernie has the same perspective, since VT is surprisingly expensive due to all that artisanal cheese and former-execs-back-to-the-landers.   

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2021/02/06/over-50-house-democrats-ask-biden-not-to-lower-income-threshold-for-1400-stimulus-checks/?sh=31b89573350e

Edited by Swamp Yankee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Swamp Yankee said:

 

Agreed. 

 

"There were no tanks rolling on the capitol, no politicians arrested, no process undone. Congress was back in session in a matter of hours."

As homestar noted, these things are indicative of being over the edge, to keep our vernacular consistent.  That in mind, what are other indications of imminent chaos?  What would have actually concerned you?

Military units dissenting, journalists being silenced, prominent figures disappearing, protestors meeting firing lines, businesses and property being seized based on political affiliation or identity group... Guys, we aren't close.

 

~5,000 idiots stormed the Capitol, and were only successful because the police response to rioting was dialed back as a result of the race riot optics. They (aggregate, not a couple here and there) didn't intend to kill people, because of they did there wouldn't be 5 deaths, there would be hundreds. You can even see in the video how they basically walk around the cops. 

 

Let's have some consistency. Either the race riots over the summer were worse, and much more representative of us going over the edge, or neither riot represented "barely missing." I think the latter.

 

It's amazing to me how many people on both sides I talk to that think we're right on the edge, yet all of you are sitting on your asses doing nothing. If I truly believed that police were systemically killing black people in our society, or I believed that our Democratic processes were being stolen from us, I'd be taking to the street with my guns as well.

 

I think perhaps the intellectual class has gotten so used to talking in riddles that we've all forgotten how to speak literally. We are literally not close to the edge.

 

Yes, Trump incited a riot. And it was a shameful moment in our history, perhaps one of the most shameful. That doesn't mean it represented an immediate threat to the Constitution or our way of life.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Military units dissenting, journalists being silenced, prominent figures disappearing, protestors meeting firing lines, businesses and property being seized based on political affiliation or identity group... Guys, we aren't close.

 

~5,000 idiots stormed the Capitol, and were only successful because the police response to rioting was dialed back as a result of the race riot optics. They (aggregate, not a couple here and there) didn't intend to kill people, because of they did there wouldn't be 5 deaths, there would be hundreds. You can even see in the video how they basically walk around the cops. 

 

Let's have some consistency. Either the race riots over the summer were worse, and much more representative of us going over the edge, or neither riot represented "barely missing." I think the latter.

 

It's amazing to me how many people on both sides I talk to that think we're right on the edge, yet all of you are sitting on your asses doing nothing. If I truly believed that police were systemically killing black people in our society, or I believed that our Democratic processes were being stolen from us, I'd be taking to the street with my guns as well.

 

I think perhaps the intellectual class has gotten so used to talking in riddles that we've all forgotten how to speak literally. We are literally not close to the edge.

 

Yes, Trump incited a riot. And it was a shameful moment in our history, perhaps one of the most shameful. That doesn't mean it represented an immediate threat to the Constitution or our way of life.

There's an enormous false equivalence here. The "race riots" were an organic reaction of the populace to a thing that actually happened.. the brutal killing of George Floyd by police.. caught completely on video. 
 

The capitol riot was incited by the sitting president of the United States spreading blatant falsehoods about a fair election because his own ego couldn't handle the fact that he lost.  And even though the number of people who stormed the capitol is very small in the grand scheme of things, the scariest part of this is that ~40% of republicans believe the same narrative that motivated those rioters.


If you don't understand how the latter is far more dangerous to our country than the former, we don't have a lot left to talk about.  

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Swamp Yankee said:

The income cap reduction is being championed by Joe Manchin, who is considered one of the most conservative democrats in the Senate.  In AOC's NYC, $150k family is barely middle-class.  Bernie has the same perspective, since VT is surprisingly expensive due to all that artisanal cheese and former-execs-back-to-the-landers.   

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2021/02/06/over-50-house-democrats-ask-biden-not-to-lower-income-threshold-for-1400-stimulus-checks/?sh=31b89573350e

Like I said the party is over and the tug of war has begun.  Will he have the stones to stay in the middle given all that unity and stuff or will he end up under the thumb of the squad...

Joe is also pushing back on his key Stone Pipeline EO - Sen. Manchin Urges Biden to Permit Keystone XL Pipeline

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...