Election 2020 - Page 210 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
By Doug64
#15120229
The thought occurs to me that the Democrats' focus on mail-in voting could really come back to bite them. So far as I know, there are no states that won't have on-site voting, and with a 10% to 20% rejection of the mail-in ballots that actually make it in, the votes of those that use the on-site locations are significantly more likely to be counted. And with the Wuhan virus subsiding, Republican voters will be less worried about using them. Which means that without substantially reducing--even gutting--the protections put in place to avoid mail-in voter fraud, Democrats' encouraging their voters to use mail-in ballots might substantially reduce their vote count. But if they do reduce those protections and win, they will never convince Republicans that their victory isn't fraudulent. And with what I've read about Democrats holding discussions about getting rid of the Senate filibuster so they can push through their agenda, we could actually see a real secession movement start up in the Red states.

Of course, "they can't cheat if you win big," and we may be surprised on Election Day with a wave that makes all the worries meaningless. If that happens, I wonder if Democrats will give up their conspiratorial fantasies about Trump's victory in 2016 being illegitimate and face the fact that there are serious issues with their (racially) divide and conquer electoral strategy.
User avatar
By blackjack21
#15120246
Trump claims there are more peace deals in the pipeline. Saudi Arabia is possibly on that list. Can you imagine if before the election, Trump secures Saudi recognition for the State of Israel and an exchange of ambassadors? UAE and Bahrain... That's kind of an October Surprise. Who else? Kuwait? Oman? Qatar? Saudi Arabia? It's got to be driving State Department personnel crazy that they aren't the architects of this agreement.
User avatar
By Wulfschilde
#15120253
Doug64 wrote:The thought occurs to me that the Democrats' focus on mail-in voting could really come back to bite them. So far as I know, there are no states that won't have on-site voting, and with a 10% to 20% rejection of the mail-in ballots that actually make it in, the votes of those that use the on-site locations are significantly more likely to be counted. And with the Wuhan virus subsiding, Republican voters will be less worried about using them. Which means that without substantially reducing--even gutting--the protections put in place to avoid mail-in voter fraud, Democrats' encouraging their voters to use mail-in ballots might substantially reduce their vote count. But if they do reduce those protections and win, they will never convince Republicans that their victory isn't fraudulent. And with what I've read about Democrats holding discussions about getting rid of the Senate filibuster so they can push through their agenda, we could actually see a real secession movement start up in the Red states.

Of course, "they can't cheat if you win big," and we may be surprised on Election Day with a wave that makes all the worries meaningless. If that happens, I wonder if Democrats will give up their conspiratorial fantasies about Trump's victory in 2016 being illegitimate and face the fact that there are serious issues with their (racially) divide and conquer electoral strategy.

The presumption in some circles is that the Dems want mail-in voting because it's easier to cheat with it, or to at least muddy the waters and delay Trump's win.

But I think you're right, it could backfire because there might also be weird, irregular turnout numbers across states and counties, which will raise even more questions.
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#15120282
blackjack21 wrote:Trump claims there are more peace deals in the pipeline. Saudi Arabia is possibly on that list. Can you imagine if before the election, Trump secures Saudi recognition for the State of Israel and an exchange of ambassadors? UAE and Bahrain... That's kind of an October Surprise. Who else? Kuwait? Oman? Qatar? Saudi Arabia? It's got to be driving State Department personnel crazy that they aren't the architects of this agreement.


Does this ultimately matter in the US election? I have stated this quadzillion times: Foreighn policy is ultimately non-interesting to the US electorate. There is research on this also by researchers and presenters for companies like Zeithan etc The only state the really cares about foreign stuff is Texas but that is mostly related to trade with Mexico.

The more important things are Covid, Economy, Unemployment and Healthcare in that order and then everything else where BLM and riots are like a 3rd tier issue.
User avatar
By KurtFF8
#15120316
blackjack21 wrote:Trump claims there are more peace deals in the pipeline. Saudi Arabia is possibly on that list. Can you imagine if before the election, Trump secures Saudi recognition for the State of Israel and an exchange of ambassadors? UAE and Bahrain... That's kind of an October Surprise. Who else? Kuwait? Oman? Qatar? Saudi Arabia? It's got to be driving State Department personnel crazy that they aren't the architects of this agreement.


Are any of those countries at war with Israel?
User avatar
By Beren
#15120318
JohnRawls wrote:Does this ultimately matter in the US election?

Not that much. Bush I won the Gulf War spectacularly, so what? Now Trump, or rather Kushner makes peace between allies, so what? :lol:
By Doug64
#15120322
JohnRawls wrote:Does this ultimately matter in the US election?

At this point, every little bit helps. People’s positive perception of Trump’s foreign policy successes can bleed over to their perceptions of his performance on other issues more dear to their hearts.
User avatar
By Beren
#15120328
Doug64 wrote:At this point, every little bit helps. People’s positive perception of Trump’s foreign policy successes can bleed over to their perceptions of his performance on other issues more dear to their hearts.

Do you mean it's supposed to be a desperate foreign policy move to compensate for all the domestic failures and possibly save the presidency for Trump? :lol:
By Doug64
#15120350
Beren wrote:Do you mean it's supposed to be a desperate foreign policy move to compensate for all the domestic failures and possibly save the presidency for Trump? :lol:

Considering that this is probably the result of years of work? No, not likely.
User avatar
By Beren
#15120352
Doug64 wrote:Considering that this is probably the result of years of work? No, not likely.

Even the timing doesn't make it likely for you, Trumper Dumber? :lol:
By Doug64
#15120358
Beren wrote:Even the timing doesn't make it likely for you, Trumper Dumber? :lol:

Considering that this is probably the result of years of work? No, not likely.
User avatar
By Beren
#15120359
Doug64 wrote:Considering that this is probably the result of years of work? No, not likely.

Could you repeat it once again, please? With some emphasis on years of work perhaps. :lol:
By Doug64
#15120390
Beren wrote:Could you repeat it once again, please? With some emphasis on years of work perhaps. :lol:

Do you think that this kind of diplomatic breakthrough is thrown together in a couple of weeks on a whim?
User avatar
By Beren
#15120393
Doug64 wrote:Do you think that this kind of diplomatic breakthrough is thrown together in a couple of weeks on a whim?

I'm sure it didn't take years of work, and I also don't think it was so hard to bring Israel and the Gulf states together - against Iran - at the cost of Palestine.
User avatar
By blackjack21
#15120419
JohnRawls wrote:Does this ultimately matter in the US election? I have stated this quadzillion times: Foreighn policy is ultimately non-interesting to the US electorate.

It certainly was during the Nixon, Carter and Reagan years. The charge against Trump is that he's dangerous. That he's going to start a nuclear war. Instead, he's brokered peace between two Arab/Muslim states and Israel. Obama and Bush didn't get that done. Clinton brokered a peace treaty between Israel and Jordan. Carter gets props for brokering a deal between Egypt and Israel. It's basically establishing Trump as more than a politician. He's now a statesman. So one of the big charges against Trump is now not only moot, but wrong.

Rugoz wrote:Peace deals my ass, they were not even at war with each other. Like wtf? :lol:

Neither Bahrain nor the UAE recognized the legitimacy of the State of Israel. It's actually a huge deal in the Arab world. It's also an overt pledge that some Arab states and Israel will stand together against Iran.

KurtFF8 wrote:Are any of those countries at war with Israel?

The following countries do not recognize the State of Israel with formal diplomatic relations:

Afghanistan
Algeria
Bangladesh
Bhutan
Brunei
Comoros
Djibouti
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Kuwait
Lebanon
Libya
Malaysia
Mali
Mauritania
Morocco - Although has de facto recognition with a trade deal.
Niger
North Korea
Oman
Pakistan
Qatar - Although has de facto recognition with a trade deal.
Saudi Arabia
Somalia
Sudan
Syria
Tunisia - Although has de facto recognition
Venezuela - Suspended relations in 2009
Yemen

With the United Arab Emirates, UAE and Bahrain recognizing Israel, it probably won't be long before we see some others, like Morocco, Qatar and Tunisia. Saudi Arabia and Oman are probably in the works too, along with Kuwait.

Doug64 wrote:At this point, every little bit helps. People’s positive perception of Trump’s foreign policy successes can bleed over to their perceptions of his performance on other issues more dear to their hearts.

The establishment basically just lies, and they think that's a strategy. This is a big part of why I ended up leaving the Republican party. Lying is not a strategy. It's a tactic. So the establishment's characterization of Trump as a dangerous war monger who was going to start a nuclear war was totally wrong. It's been laid bare.

Beren wrote:I'm sure it didn't take years of work, and I also don't think it was so hard to bring Israel and the Gulf states together - against Iran - at the cost of Palestine.

Diplomatic relations means you accept the legitimacy of the State of Israel formally--something they have never done before. It's not trivial.
User avatar
By Beren
#15120426
blackjack21 wrote:Diplomatic relations means you accept the legitimacy of the State of Israel formally--something they have never done before. It's not trivial.

Sure, the Gulf states officially recognising Israel may even sound like a big deal to dummies in Ohio or Pennsylvania, but it should be trivial rather than magnificent actually. However, blathering about peace making is just fucking ridiculous. :lol:
User avatar
By Beren
#15120434
Rancid wrote:Saw a random headline saying the Florida is looking like Trump will win it.

Will it make you sleep bad tonight?
  • 1
  • 208
  • 209
  • 210
  • 211
  • 212
  • 220
Election 2020

For black people in the US, the choice seems to b[…]

This is a stretch. I think what most left-wing po[…]

@Finfinder José Mujica. ------------- I was […]

First 2020 Debate Thread

.... ... Conrad Black’s ...... Black is both[…]