-
@Kiwiwomble said in US Politics:
@Winger you believe hundreds/thousands of people would be complicit in national level voter fraud but not that individuals would lie under oath?
And for what? There’s no guaranteed personal gain here. The best that can happen is your team wins. Conversely the downside if you get convicted is catastrophic.
You’re not just talking about people being reckless with their vote, you’re talking about career officials conspiring to commit fraud and solicit votes in their public office. The penalties for these people are massive. They will get fined. They will likely go to jail. They’ll lose their jobs. Most of them will be lawyers, so they’re disbarred too, so they’ll never work again. And they’d do this for Joe Biden? Seriously?
For a huge network of them to do this believing they have impunity makes no sense. For each of them it’s a simple cost-benefit calculation, with little benefit if you win and huge cost if you lose.Multiply that by the number of people you need to get this fix in and I just can’t see how it could logistically be done.
-
@JC said in US Politics:
And they’d do this for Joe Biden?
no, but they'd risk thier careers and livelihoods to rid themselves of Trump, cos that is the onliest way Trump could be beaten...
-
@JC said in US Politics:
And for what? There’s no guaranteed personal gain here.
There are many ways to reward people for a job well done. For the top dogs. Books deals (50 million +), speaking fees (500,000 per day). consulting jobs. Or UN / WHO appointments etc. At a lesser level. Job promotions. Holidays. Women (or men). Status. And I'm sure a lot more
Trump threatened trillions in profits (esp the climate gravy train). This will all be full steam ahead again. Of course we will pay for this as the elite get even more super rich
-
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Kirwan said in US Politics:
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Kirwan said in US Politics:
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
Peaceful protests?
Seems to depend on which side you are on.
Big concern would be Antifa & BLM fruitcakes now kicking off thinking they have Biden & Harris's support.
That's a disgusting statement. Reading this made my skin crawl.
I think you are confusing legitimate concerns of African Americans with the organisation called BLM. Because the later has serious problems, not least being have anti-Semitic leaders.
And Antifa are violent scum.
Respectfully, I disagree. To me, both causes have very legitimate concerns. Sure, the BLM has some issues but at its heart, it is attempting to bring to the fore the fact of systemic racism including that within many police departments in the U.S.
Also, IMHO, ATIFA are not an organisation as such but it certainly stands against Fascism and white supremacy, both of which are appalling. And quite frankly, they are the result of the rise of violent right wing extremism which is far, far more dangerous.
Antifa are the most ironically named organisation. Actual fascists and shown over and over to be violent thugs.
Again, respectfully disagree. ATIFA = Anti-Fascist and that's exactly what they are. They rose up as an organic response and counter to the growing right wing extremism. They show up as a counter protesters to the right wing nut jobs and I have all the respect in the world for that.
Clearly, the real "violent thugs" that present a real and present danger is the real fascists, the right wing, white nationalists and supremacists. Groups like the Proud Boys and many many others are a far greater threat, it's why the FBI has labeled right wing nationalism/white supremacy as being a much greater risk.
Sorry, I take serious issue with this view.
There is nothing wrong with being a supporter of BLM / Anitfa. At what should be their core (and perhaps is) is a movement to ensure equality for all. It's what they project, it's what they support.
What I take serious issue with, is that any criticism of them has you labelled as a racist / white supremist etc. That is just plain bullshit and deserves to be called out. There is a clear narrative from both to shut down any debate around their organisations with the accusations. Antifa have been present at many marches / protests which have ended in violence. And as for BLM, you'd have to have your head completely in the sand to think these protest have been peaceful as Michelle Obama claims. Further up the thread it said 93% have been peaceful - well that's cool, but do we just ignore the 7% that haven't? I'm as aware as anybody that MSM would rather show violent scuffles than peaceful marches, but these things happened & they shouldn't be ignored.
This is not to try and play down the threat of the far right / white supremacists etc. Quite far from it. I'm no sucker for the bullshit they speak, but that same applies to all organisations. BLM / Antifa are not exempt.
-
@Godder said in US Politics:
@Kiwiwomble said in US Politics:
@Winger who said the military are coming in?
they way ive had it explained is they may invoke the 25th because he can still do a lot in 2 weeks and if people are concerned about is mental state then it is the option on the table
In particular, he wouldn't be able to pardon anyone else, like his family.
Doesn’t it also bar him from running again?
-
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Godder said in US Politics:
@Kiwiwomble said in US Politics:
@Winger who said the military are coming in?
they way ive had it explained is they may invoke the 25th because he can still do a lot in 2 weeks and if people are concerned about is mental state then it is the option on the table
In particular, he wouldn't be able to pardon anyone else, like his family.
Doesn’t it also bar him from running again?
No, that would require impeachment.
Invoking the 25th amendment is the process by which VP and Cabinet declare the president unfit for continued duty and the VP takes on the duties of president (if disputed, it is referred to Congress for a decision). Current reports are that Pence is not willing to go down that road, so it will be impeachment or nothing. If the Republicans want to be rid of Trump in primaries, that would be an option - it's basically 22 months till the next elections, so they have some time to get rid of his influence.
-
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Kirwan said in US Politics:
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Kirwan said in US Politics:
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
Peaceful protests?
Seems to depend on which side you are on.
Big concern would be Antifa & BLM fruitcakes now kicking off thinking they have Biden & Harris's support.
That's a disgusting statement. Reading this made my skin crawl.
I think you are confusing legitimate concerns of African Americans with the organisation called BLM. Because the later has serious problems, not least being have anti-Semitic leaders.
And Antifa are violent scum.
Respectfully, I disagree. To me, both causes have very legitimate concerns. Sure, the BLM has some issues but at its heart, it is attempting to bring to the fore the fact of systemic racism including that within many police departments in the U.S.
Also, IMHO, ATIFA are not an organisation as such but it certainly stands against Fascism and white supremacy, both of which are appalling. And quite frankly, they are the result of the rise of violent right wing extremism which is far, far more dangerous.
Antifa are the most ironically named organisation. Actual fascists and shown over and over to be violent thugs.
Again, respectfully disagree. ATIFA = Anti-Fascist and that's exactly what they are. They rose up as an organic response and counter to the growing right wing extremism. They show up as a counter protesters to the right wing nut jobs and I have all the respect in the world for that.
Clearly, the real "violent thugs" that present a real and present danger is the real fascists, the right wing, white nationalists and supremacists. Groups like the Proud Boys and many many others are a far greater threat, it's why the FBI has labeled right wing nationalism/white supremacy as being a much greater risk.
Sorry, I take serious issue with this view.
There is nothing wrong with being a supporter of BLM / Anitfa. At what should be their core (and perhaps is) is a movement to ensure equality for all. It's what they project, it's what they support.
What I take serious issue with, is that any criticism of them has you labelled as a racist / white supremist etc. That is just plain bullshit and deserves to be called out. There is a clear narrative from both to shut down any debate around their organisations with the accusations. Antifa have been present at many marches / protests which have ended in violence. And as for BLM, you'd have to have your head completely in the sand to think these protest have been peaceful as Michelle Obama claims. Further up the thread it said 93% have been peaceful - well that's cool, but do we just ignore the 7% that haven't? I'm as aware as anybody that MSM would rather show violent scuffles than peaceful marches, but these things happened & they shouldn't be ignored.
This is not to try and play down the threat of the far right / white supremacists etc. Quite far from it. I'm no sucker for the bullshit they speak, but that same applies to all organisations. BLM / Antifa are not exempt.
At what point have I said anything like this in BOLD above in your statement. Clearly you read this into my statements, not I.
I also agree with the bolded statement. But I also can't stand by when people are throwing smears at BLM and ANTIFA when the real issue is with the far right. FFS the FBI agree with this.
But I have never said anything like what you read into it, so what you read into my words is on your own self @MajorRage
Sure, ANTIFA have been at many marches which have ended in violence... but who the f*ck else was there? Who were they responding to?
-
@RoninWC I don’t think @MajorRage suggested you had said that. I read it that he doesn’t like that in general anybody who raises any concern is routinely labelled that way.
Edit: BTW for my money, a thug looking for a ruck remains one, no matter the what the purported cause is.
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@JC said in US Politics:
And for what? There’s no guaranteed personal gain here.
There are many ways to reward people for a job well done. For the top dogs. Books deals (50 million +), speaking fees (500,000 per day). consulting jobs. Or UN / WHO appointments etc. At a lesser level. Job promotions. Holidays. Women (or men). Status. And I'm sure a lot more
So you’re saying that a public employee - the Librarian perhaps - of a small Georgia town who doubles as the county election official is committing fraud for a book deal? We’re going to see the types of low-level public servants who do this work getting promotions to serve as UN ambassadors?
Or if that’s over the top: status they can’t show off because it would attract too much attention? Holidays they can’t accept because they only get 2 weeks per year? Nobody in their right mind would take the risk of doing that for such paltry returns given the potential for getting caught and it being predicated on your side winning, because if the other side does, you and yours are truly fucked, and the democratic party will disavow you in a heartbeat.
Trump threatened trillions in profits (esp the climate gravy train). This will all be full steam ahead again. Of course we will pay for this as the elite get even more super rich
Be consistent. You were telling us how great Trump was for business.
None of this is real mate. It’s what-ifs piled on top of maybes and perhapses. Time to let it go. There are enough real injustices to solve, actual crimes to prosecute and good causes to aid without dwelling on an unwieldy conspiracy theory.
-
@JC agree 100%. These days we desperately need some nuance in how we look at things. Makes total sense that there will be a range of people involved in each group, with their own fringe elements. Not to mention different leaders and factions given most of these causes are nationwide.
-
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Kirwan said in US Politics:
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Kirwan said in US Politics:
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
Peaceful protests?
Seems to depend on which side you are on.
Big concern would be Antifa & BLM fruitcakes now kicking off thinking they have Biden & Harris's support.
That's a disgusting statement. Reading this made my skin crawl.
I think you are confusing legitimate concerns of African Americans with the organisation called BLM. Because the later has serious problems, not least being have anti-Semitic leaders.
And Antifa are violent scum.
Respectfully, I disagree. To me, both causes have very legitimate concerns. Sure, the BLM has some issues but at its heart, it is attempting to bring to the fore the fact of systemic racism including that within many police departments in the U.S.
Also, IMHO, ATIFA are not an organisation as such but it certainly stands against Fascism and white supremacy, both of which are appalling. And quite frankly, they are the result of the rise of violent right wing extremism which is far, far more dangerous.
Antifa are the most ironically named organisation. Actual fascists and shown over and over to be violent thugs.
Again, respectfully disagree. ATIFA = Anti-Fascist and that's exactly what they are. They rose up as an organic response and counter to the growing right wing extremism. They show up as a counter protesters to the right wing nut jobs and I have all the respect in the world for that.
Clearly, the real "violent thugs" that present a real and present danger is the real fascists, the right wing, white nationalists and supremacists. Groups like the Proud Boys and many many others are a far greater threat, it's why the FBI has labeled right wing nationalism/white supremacy as being a much greater risk.
Sorry, I take serious issue with this view.
There is nothing wrong with being a supporter of BLM / Anitfa. At what should be their core (and perhaps is) is a movement to ensure equality for all. It's what they project, it's what they support.
What I take serious issue with, is that any criticism of them has you labelled as a racist / white supremist etc. That is just plain bullshit and deserves to be called out. There is a clear narrative from both to shut down any debate around their organisations with the accusations. Antifa have been present at many marches / protests which have ended in violence. And as for BLM, you'd have to have your head completely in the sand to think these protest have been peaceful as Michelle Obama claims. Further up the thread it said 93% have been peaceful - well that's cool, but do we just ignore the 7% that haven't? I'm as aware as anybody that MSM would rather show violent scuffles than peaceful marches, but these things happened & they shouldn't be ignored.
This is not to try and play down the threat of the far right / white supremacists etc. Quite far from it. I'm no sucker for the bullshit they speak, but that same applies to all organisations. BLM / Antifa are not exempt.
At what point have I said anything like this in BOLD above in your statement. Clearly you read this into my statements, not I.
I didn't say that you did. It's a common narrative which you'll find attached to pretty much so every written, objetionalable piece which raises fair criticisms of both these organisations. What you did say is this:
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
Peaceful protests?
Seems to depend on which side you are on.
Big concern would be Antifa & BLM fruitcakes now kicking off thinking they have Biden & Harris's support.
That's a disgusting statement. Reading this made my skin crawl.
Which I think is a pretty thinly veiled insult of VM's views. Which comes down to the same narrative.
That Antifa & BLM are above criticism.
I also agree with the bolded statement. But I also can't stand by when people are throwing smears at BLM and ANTIFA when the real issue is with the far right. FFS the FBI agree with this.
Why can't the issue be with both sides? Why is the "REAL" issue with the far-right?
But I have never said anything like what you read into it, so what you read into my words is on your own self @MajorRage
You keep posting things that suggest what I'm reading is what you think. I'm just debating your points which put across, some of which I heavily disagree with.
Sure, ANTIFA have been at many marches which have ended in violence... but who the f*ck else was there? Who were they responding to?
Why is your first question who else is there? It is seemingly impossible in your view that Antifa have caused any violence?
If a bunch of right wing folks choose to do march about something and anitifa turn up purely to counter protest and it ends up in violence, why is that the right-wing marchers fault? If Anitfa do a march and right-wing thugs turn up purely to create havoc, then I think its' fair to say that the right wing folks caused violence. Yet, if it's the reverse, it still seem to be reported that it's the right wing guys fault. That is complete horse shit.
-
@JC speaking of crimes, a mob of white people stormed the Capitol, the most important political building at the heart of the federal government of the USA, to try and disrupt the counting of the college ballots. They walked off with stuff, sat in the speaker of the house's chair, walked into representatives' offices. And what was the police response? No tear gas? No riot police? I want someone to say with a straight face that the outcome would have been the same if the protestors were black
-
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@NTA said in US Politics:
These guys are just a core of conspiracy theorists, surrounded by opportunists, and a smattering of simpletons, having a giant sook about an election they're too stupid to accept they lost.
Sounds like many of Remainers we have in the UK.
Sorry, just to correct you, that is the domain of "leavers"!
I assume you're being ironic?
Within hours of the 2016 vote to leave the EU, Remain politicians were calling for a re-run in case people had changed their minds. We then had wacky conspiracy theories for years about data mis-use, Russian payments to Leave and gerrymandering.
Which has ended up chief conspiracy theorist, The Guardian's Carole Cadwalldr, admitting in court she had no evidence at all to back up her allegations and that they were largely made up.
-
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
Sure, ANTIFA have been at many marches which have ended in violence... but who the f*ck else was there? Who were they responding to?
I think you might have just proved @MajorRage's argument that ANTIFA are only non-violent when people agree with them.
-
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Kirwan said in US Politics:
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Kirwan said in US Politics:
@RoninWC said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
Peaceful protests?
Seems to depend on which side you are on.
Big concern would be Antifa & BLM fruitcakes now kicking off thinking they have Biden & Harris's support.
That's a disgusting statement. Reading this made my skin crawl.
I think you are confusing legitimate concerns of African Americans with the organisation called BLM. Because the later has serious problems, not least being have anti-Semitic leaders.
And Antifa are violent scum.
Respectfully, I disagree. To me, both causes have very legitimate concerns. Sure, the BLM has some issues but at its heart, it is attempting to bring to the fore the fact of systemic racism including that within many police departments in the U.S.
Also, IMHO, ATIFA are not an organisation as such but it certainly stands against Fascism and white supremacy, both of which are appalling. And quite frankly, they are the result of the rise of violent right wing extremism which is far, far more dangerous.
Antifa are the most ironically named organisation. Actual fascists and shown over and over to be violent thugs.
Again, respectfully disagree. ATIFA = Anti-Fascist and that's exactly what they are. They rose up as an organic response and counter to the growing right wing extremism. They show up as a counter protesters to the right wing nut jobs and I have all the respect in the world for that.
Clearly, the real "violent thugs" that present a real and present danger is the real fascists, the right wing, white nationalists and supremacists. Groups like the Proud Boys and many many others are a far greater threat, it's why the FBI has labeled right wing nationalism/white supremacy as being a much greater risk.
The Guardian as a trusted, unbiased, factual news source on anti-"fascist" protestors?
Please.
-
@canefan said in US Politics:
@JC speaking of crimes, a mob of white people stormed the Capitol, the most important political building at the heart of the federal government of the USA, to try and disrupt the counting of the college ballots. They walked off with stuff, sat in the speaker of the house's chair, walked into representatives' offices. And what was the police response? No tear gas? No riot police? I want someone to say with a straight face that the outcome would have been the same if the protestors were black
There's certainly legitimate concerns at how the police reacted which need to be thoroughly investigated.
But the way that Biden Harris & Obama have immediately politiced this - without knowing the facts - and compared it to BLM protests does not bode well for US politics. Exactly the sort of think Trump would do.
US Politics