[annatar1914]

I have a well-meant advice for you. Whenever you want to say something, consider the opposite being true.

I'd say the same for you, as nothing you say is ''well meant'' from what I've seen. Nothing personal, as politics makes many people toxic when discussing these matters in cyberspace.

[ckaihatsu]

HOW DO YOU START A DETOX?

https://www.gaiam.com/blogs/discover/10 ... -your-body

[Politics_Observer]

@B0ycey

@Politics_Observer, the notion of Biden phoning 911 amuses me. It would be special forces involved if he refused to leave but I suspect it will be Bidens security teams that would take care of that matter first. And Trump would be arrested for trespassing as well. But all this is merely hearsay. Once the electoral college vote, Trump will concede

There is no guarantee that Trump will concede. However, it won't matter because if Trump doesn't leave the White House once his term expires he will be removed once Biden assumes the powers of the Presidency. I do think Trump is entertaining a run in 2024 which I think should be illegal. The most anybody can serve as President is two terms. Trump is a one term President.

I think the only way you should be able to serve two terms is if those two terms are consecutive. Otherwise, you can't lose a second term and then run later on for that second term that you failed to secure after your first term. If I was Biden, I would be pushing to pass a law or amendment to ensure this. I also support term limits for Senators and members of House of Representatives.

I especially don't trust Trump running again because I know he will do anything he can to destroy our constitution and become dictator if he can get away with it. He failed to get away with it this time but that doesn't mean he won't try again. That's what makes Trump a threat to the U.S. and it's constitution. You have to be vigilant against dangerous people like Trump if you want to ensure the democratic institutions of government survive. Freedom and democracy is earned and are not given.

Right now, from what I have been hearing on the news, he has been pursuing a strategy called "borrowing" where he takes his loyalists and gives them career positions with civil service protections where it's hard to fire them. Why is he doing this? Well, I think it's because he wants to try to run again in 2024.

He will be 78 years old though and getting up there in age if he does. He might not be in the best of health. There is no guarantees Trump would win re-election in a 2024 bid either. I also think Trump should face criminal charges too once Biden assumes the powers of the Presidency on January 20th. I do think Trump broke some laws and should be prosecuted. Whether Trump is criminally prosecuted or not though remains to be seen.

[Stormsmith]

NY State Prosecutor Cy Vance will pick him up

[Politics_Observer]

@Stormsmith

NY State Prosecutor Cy Vance will pick him up

I hope he does.

[Dimetrodon]

I have made assumptions based on known facts. Whereas, you simply are emoting malignantly. I don't mind being wrong for the right reasons, whereas there are people who are never right even when they sometimes happen upon a single fact to hang their delusions on.

And this isn't over yet, Trump could still win without being anointed President by the Media and Tech giants.

I would categorize that as overturning the election, as he really did lose.

[MistyTiger]

I hope Cuomo or someone else decks Trump once he is out of office. Trump deserves an old fashioned beating.

[annatar1914]

I would categorize that as overturning the election, as he really did lose.

Entirely wrong. Read the 12th Amendment to the US Constitution and you'll know exactly what I'm talking about.

Absolutely Constitutional, this election isn't over, and both sides would be doing this if it was their chance at victory.

[Dimetrodon]

Entirely wrong. Read the 12th Amendment to the US Constitution and you'll know exactly what I'm talking about.

Absolutely Constitutional, this election isn't over, and both sides would be doing this if it was their chance at victory.

We already know how those electors are supposed to (with the exception of the faithless electors) vote. An attempt to get the electoral college to override the will of the constituents who elected them would be a blatant power grab that would cause outrage. This isn't merely one side losing the popular vote, but would entail electors going against their constituents who voted a certain way.

[annatar1914]

We already know how those electors are supposed to (with the exception of the faithless electors) vote. An attempt to get the electoral college to override the will of the constituents who elected them would be a blatant power grab that would cause outrage. This isn't merely one side losing the popular vote, but would entail electors going against their constituents who voted a certain way.

Again, it seems like you're not understanding, or willing to understand. Look into the role of the state legislatures and the electoral collage for one thing, the US has been down a similar road before institutionally before and survived. If the Courts are involved, the State legislatures, and so forth, it's still working. America is not run entirely by popular vote, and has an illiberal constitution.

[Rancid]

I hope Cuomo or someone else decks Trump once he is out of office. Trump deserves an old fashioned beating.

Even though he wouldn't be president at the time, pretty sure it will be treated as such. I suggest no one decks him.

[Dimetrodon]

Again, it seems like you're not understanding, or willing to understand. Look into the role of the state legislatures and the electoral collage for one thing, the US has been down a similar road before institutionally before and survived. If the Courts are involved, the State legislatures, and so forth, it's still working. America is not run entirely by popular vote, and has an illiberal constitution.

I get that the popular vote is not how the President is appointed, but don't think that people wouldn't be outraged by the electoral college overriding the projected winner without a just cause. It's not like 2016 where Trump won all the right places and thus was the rightful winner even when losing the popular vote. This is a case where the over 270 votes should go to Biden as Biden won the right states for that to happen, and thus got to a projected count of over 270, and people don't vote for piss and giggles, but actually have a reasonable expectation that at least most of the electors will vote the way the area voted. The only way for that to reverse the current count would be if they override whom they're supposed to vote for and went with Trump. 33 states have laws against doing that already, and that was upheld by the SCOTUS. Even if you rely on the states that don't have such laws, it's likely such an override would cause massive social unrest, as it would be just a blatant power-grab by someone who supposed to have lost based on the way the game is normally played. Don't think people would just go with that, because they won't. They aren't appointed to have carte blanche and there probably would be a constitutional crisis. Their meeting is supposed to be a formality at this point. It exists to counterbalance densely populated states, which is something they've already done, not go against procedure and societal expectations on a whim.

I understand what you want to do, and it's not something that would be tolerated or something that the electoral college is supposed to do under these circumstances. Faithless electors have been minor blips simply because they usually don't impact the outcome of the election, and this would be significantly different than things like the compromise of 1877. It would be changing the rules arbitrarily after losing by violating precedent.

[annatar1914]

I get that the popular vote is not how the President is appointed, but don't think that people wouldn't be outraged by the electoral college overriding the projected winner without a just cause. It's not like 2016 where Trump won all the right places and thus was the rightful winner even when losing the popular vote. This is a case where the over 270 votes should go to Biden as Biden won the right states for that to happen, and thus got to a projected count of over 270, and people don't vote for piss and giggles, but actually have a reasonable expectation that at least most of the electors will vote the way the area voted. The only way for that to reverse the current count would be if they override whom they're supposed to vote for and went with Trump. 33 states have laws against doing that already, and that was upheld by the SCOTUS. Even if you rely on the states that don't have such laws, it's likely such an override would cause massive social unrest, as it would be just a blatant power-grab by someone who supposed to have lost based on the way the game is normally played. Don't think people would just go with that, because they won't. They aren't appointed to have carte blanche and there probably would be a constitutional crisis. Their meeting is supposed to be a formality at this point. It exists to counterbalance densely populated states, which is something they've already done, not go against procedure and societal expectations on a whim.

I understand what you want to do, and it's not something that would be tolerated or something that the electoral college is supposed to do under these circumstances. Faithless electors have been minor blips simply because they usually don't impact the outcome of the election, and this would be significantly different than things like the compromise of 1877. It would be changing the rules arbitrarily after losing by violating precedent.

What I want to do? Again, strictly speaking, everything is in place for a win, especially if it's shown that there is significant voter fraud, the equivalent of a CIA ''color revolution'' of the sort that has happened often in recent decades. No amount of gaslighting and wishful thinking is going to stop it. The whole point of the ''faithless elector'' situation is an assumption that the slate of delegates is valid from a valid election process to begin with.

They hated Trump so much and got it in their heads that he was a ''Hitler'' of some kind, that they justified doing anything to stop him and those who vote for him, literally anything at all no matter how wrong or illegal.

And now that could possibly bite them in the ass.

[Dimetrodon]

@annatar1914 That fraud claim is nonsense and just an excuse for you guys to grab power. Virtually everyone other than hardcore Trumpians view the election as legit. Trump lost as he wasn't popular. Get over it.

[annatar1914]

@annatar1914 That fraud claim is nonsense and just an excuse for you guys to grab power. Virtually everyone other than hardcore Trumpians view the election as legit. Trump lost as he wasn't popular. Get over it.

I guess you never really read my posts. I'm a Socialist. I'm not for Trump, I'm against Liberalism and the faux-left. Repeating things like a mantra and telling people who tell you inconvenient facts that they're Trump supporters is not going to make this go away. He's not going away, he really does have a good chance at still winning this election. I can emotionally survive a Biden or Trump victory; can you survive a Trump victory if he confounds your expectations?

[Dimetrodon]

can you survive a Trump victory if he confounds your expectations?

Your posts don't really paint you as anti-Trump as much as you think they do then. Anyway, If Trump won legitimately then yes, I can handle him. If he pulled some legally questionable shit, that's another story, as one should fight for the rule of law.

Edit: Just to be clear, I'm not a liberal, nor am I a fan of the Democratic Party.

[Red_Army]

If Trump pulls off the laziest most half-assed coup and the Dems and everyone just let it happen I will impressed. The real question is whether the Republicans will put their thumb on the scale to bail out Trump and assuage the ramblings of their dipshit base or if they'll land on the side of keeping business as usual with an eye to the stock market. I guarantee McConnell and the bigwigs all want the second option, but they don't know if they can afford to offend the whooping masses.

[Rancid]

Edit: Just to be clear, I'm not a liberal, nor am I a fan of the Democratic Party.

When he say's liberal, he means liberal democrat. That is, both Republicans and Democrats are liberal democrats. Anyone that supports the current system in America (really the west) is a liberal democrat.

[Dimetrodon]

When he say's liberal, he means liberal democrat. That is, both Republicans and Democrats are liberal democrats. Anyone that supports the current system in America (really the west) is a liberal democrat.

I'd probably fall under that category even though I'm not really for the current system.

[ckaihatsu]

If Trump pulls off the laziest most half-assed coup and the Dems and everyone just let it happen I will impressed. The real question is whether the Republicans will put their thumb on the scale to bail out Trump and assuage the ramblings of their dipshit base or if they'll land on the side of keeping business as usual with an eye to the stock market. I guarantee McConnell and the bigwigs all want the second option, but they don't know if they can afford to offend the whooping masses.

The feds already infiltrated and shut down that fascist conspiracy in Michigan, so presumably they know what major kind of shit is being planned from within fascist circles *before* it goes down.

With *that* power base gone, what else does Trump have left? He can't do a coup without the military, and law enforcement looks to be playing-by-the-book here, so what's conceivably up-his-sleeve? He looks to be going out with a *whimper*.