The Trump Presidency

First topic message reminder :

Well we'll wait and see about Arizona. Pundits seem to think it's a done deal; they don't seem to have considered it's only Election Day votes left to count.

Ohio called, but Texas and Florida not, which is very poor. Iowa should be called soon for Trump. Trump with healthy leads in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania...he needs 'em if Arizona's going blue.

Georgia seems to be faltering for Trump, but he's still ahead for now. North Carolina's probably in recount territory. unless Trump has more votes to secure it.

This mainstream media bias is quite something. Trump 49-48 ahead in Montana, 50% voted...oh yeah, that's too close to call. Trump 50-48 ahead in Virginia, 76% voted....oh yeah, we're calling that for Biden.

Yep that's right so you're not betting against a bookie as such.

Betfair Exchange and Smarkets are pretty useful I find for events like these, whereby you many not even intend to place a bet but just want to see what the probability for each outcome is. Of course you can sort of do this with conventional bookies too but they have to factor their profit margin into their odds, so you aren't being given a totally accurate representation.

Exchanges are also doing that, to an extent. Traders are using it to adjust position constantly

JuliusHMarx wrote:To be fair, that most likely (but not definitely) was a typo/auto-correct.
Despite obviously wanting Trump to win, Duty hasn't gone all nutjob on us like loads of crazy and idiotic Republicans on social media.
"Look at this proof of electoral fraud and why has no-one told the police?" Uh, because a) you've posted a screenshot from last year and b) you obviously think posting on Twitter is a better way to spend your time.

Ta.

It was certainly a typographical error, and I thought that was fairly obvious, especially as I offered a correction. Oh well.

I've only wanted Trump to win in the same way that I wanted Johnson to beat Corbyn. Two poor candidates, wouldn't vote for either if I were American.

Looks like the final score will be 306-232 Biden, presuming he holds Arizona and Georgia and Trump wins North Carolina.  

It has been, as I predicted, an incredibly close election, and I'm not surprised the narrow winner has been Biden.

Trump won the race in 2016 by around 78k votes (winning Pennsylvania by 44k, Wisconsin by 23k, Michigan by 11k - the three states that carried him over the line).

Presuming Trump wins North Carolina, Biden's win has been even narrower. The three states that have won it for him have been Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin. Biden has won Georgia by 14k, Arizona by 13k and Wisconsin by 20k - a thin margin of around 47k votes, though Biden's lead in Arizona is supposed to come down a little. Without these three states it would have been 269-269, with the Republicans (I think) holding a narrow advantage in the House of Representatives which would have decided the election in those circumstances.

Amazing that an election which has had over 150m votes comes down to such a small number.

Alaska stays GOP.....So Lyndon B remains the only Democrat ever to take it in 64....against the ultra right wing hawk known as Barry Goldwater...

"Extremism in pursuit of liberty is no vice"

The greatest political Ad of all time was put out by team LBJ....Little girl in a field with a flower counting down from 10 and when she gets to 7 a military voice takes over and then it finishes with a nuclear explosion.."Stay safe with LBJ"

Well worth a watch on YouTube..

If they are recounting in Georgia with greater access don't rule out a Trump win...Very very close there.

In order for Trump to win Georgia, an massive error of unprecedented proportions would have had to have been committed. Biden will very likely remain the winner there.

The focus now should be on the upcoming senate run-offs there. If the Dems take both, then they will have the deciding vote in the Senate in Kamala Harris.

While Trump continues to hold out, the GOP is effectively rudderless and the Dems have real and largely united leadership.

Pr4wn wrote:In order for Trump to win Georgia, an massive error of unprecedented proportions would have had to have been committed. Biden will very likely remain the winner there.

The focus now should be on the upcoming senate run-offs there. If the Dems take both, then they will have the deciding vote in the Senate in Kamala Harris.

While Trump continues to hold out, the GOP is effectively rudderless and the Dems have real and largely united leadership.

His whole Presidency has been pretty rudderless - the Republicans have dominated the agenda more by McConnell's leadership in the Senate than by anything Trump has done. However, if we are looking towards the two Senate run-offs in Georgia, we know that support for each party is pretty evenly split so the question is much more who can get their supporters out - turn-out in these run-offs has historically been pretty poor and Republican-leaning, but it's unique that in this case the result has such significance with regard to control of the Senate.

The question is whether Republicans will be more motivated by Trump's grievance that the election was stolen from him and with avoiding complete Democrat control of the Government, or Democrats to try to give Biden a chance to work with a supportive Congress.

Duty281 wrote:Looks like the final score will be 306-232 Biden, presuming he holds Arizona and Georgia and Trump wins North Carolina.  

It has been, as I predicted, an incredibly close election, and I'm not surprised the narrow winner has been Biden.

Trump won the race in 2016 by around 78k votes (winning Pennsylvania by 44k, Wisconsin by 23k, Michigan by 11k - the three states that carried him over the line).

Presuming Trump wins North Carolina, Biden's win has been even narrower. The three states that have won it for him have been Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin. Biden has won Georgia by 14k, Arizona by 13k and Wisconsin by 20k - a thin margin of around 47k votes, though Biden's lead in Arizona is supposed to come down a little. Without these three states it would have been 269-269, with the Republicans (I think) holding a narrow advantage in the House of Representatives which would have decided the election in those circumstances.

Amazing that an election which has had over 150m votes comes down to such a small number.

This really is in the eye of the beholder, I think.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/11/how-joe-biden-win-compares-past-presidential-elections/6227238002/

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Looks like the final score will be 306-232 Biden, presuming he holds Arizona and Georgia and Trump wins North Carolina.  

It has been, as I predicted, an incredibly close election, and I'm not surprised the narrow winner has been Biden.

Trump won the race in 2016 by around 78k votes (winning Pennsylvania by 44k, Wisconsin by 23k, Michigan by 11k - the three states that carried him over the line).

Presuming Trump wins North Carolina, Biden's win has been even narrower. The three states that have won it for him have been Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin. Biden has won Georgia by 14k, Arizona by 13k and Wisconsin by 20k - a thin margin of around 47k votes, though Biden's lead in Arizona is supposed to come down a little. Without these three states it would have been 269-269, with the Republicans (I think) holding a narrow advantage in the House of Representatives which would have decided the election in those circumstances.

Amazing that an election which has had over 150m votes comes down to such a small number.

This really is in the eye of the beholder, I think.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/11/how-joe-biden-win-compares-past-presidential-elections/6227238002/

Yep - Very selective reading of the votes when the margin by numbers is in the region of 5m and growing

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Looks like the final score will be 306-232 Biden, presuming he holds Arizona and Georgia and Trump wins North Carolina.  

It has been, as I predicted, an incredibly close election, and I'm not surprised the narrow winner has been Biden.

Trump won the race in 2016 by around 78k votes (winning Pennsylvania by 44k, Wisconsin by 23k, Michigan by 11k - the three states that carried him over the line).

Presuming Trump wins North Carolina, Biden's win has been even narrower. The three states that have won it for him have been Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin. Biden has won Georgia by 14k, Arizona by 13k and Wisconsin by 20k - a thin margin of around 47k votes, though Biden's lead in Arizona is supposed to come down a little. Without these three states it would have been 269-269, with the Republicans (I think) holding a narrow advantage in the House of Representatives which would have decided the election in those circumstances.

Amazing that an election which has had over 150m votes comes down to such a small number.

This really is in the eye of the beholder, I think.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/11/how-joe-biden-win-compares-past-presidential-elections/6227238002/

I don't think it is. An election that could be altered by a swing of 23.5k votes going from Dem. to Rep. in key states, when over 150m votes have been cast, is incredibly close by anyone's estimation.

lostinwales wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Looks like the final score will be 306-232 Biden, presuming he holds Arizona and Georgia and Trump wins North Carolina.  

It has been, as I predicted, an incredibly close election, and I'm not surprised the narrow winner has been Biden.

Trump won the race in 2016 by around 78k votes (winning Pennsylvania by 44k, Wisconsin by 23k, Michigan by 11k - the three states that carried him over the line).

Presuming Trump wins North Carolina, Biden's win has been even narrower. The three states that have won it for him have been Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin. Biden has won Georgia by 14k, Arizona by 13k and Wisconsin by 20k - a thin margin of around 47k votes, though Biden's lead in Arizona is supposed to come down a little. Without these three states it would have been 269-269, with the Republicans (I think) holding a narrow advantage in the House of Representatives which would have decided the election in those circumstances.

Amazing that an election which has had over 150m votes comes down to such a small number.

This really is in the eye of the beholder, I think.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/11/how-joe-biden-win-compares-past-presidential-elections/6227238002/

Yep - Very selective reading of the votes when the margin by numbers is in the region of 5m and growing

Of course it's selective. Because it's those states that have won Biden the Presidency. Racking up the numbers in California and New York is all well and good but, because of the electoral college, it matters not.

Duty281 wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Looks like the final score will be 306-232 Biden, presuming he holds Arizona and Georgia and Trump wins North Carolina.  

It has been, as I predicted, an incredibly close election, and I'm not surprised the narrow winner has been Biden.

Trump won the race in 2016 by around 78k votes (winning Pennsylvania by 44k, Wisconsin by 23k, Michigan by 11k - the three states that carried him over the line).

Presuming Trump wins North Carolina, Biden's win has been even narrower. The three states that have won it for him have been Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin. Biden has won Georgia by 14k, Arizona by 13k and Wisconsin by 20k - a thin margin of around 47k votes, though Biden's lead in Arizona is supposed to come down a little. Without these three states it would have been 269-269, with the Republicans (I think) holding a narrow advantage in the House of Representatives which would have decided the election in those circumstances.

Amazing that an election which has had over 150m votes comes down to such a small number.

This really is in the eye of the beholder, I think.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/11/how-joe-biden-win-compares-past-presidential-elections/6227238002/

Yep - Very selective reading of the votes when the margin by numbers is in the region of 5m and growing

Of course it's selective. Because it's those states that have won Biden the Presidency. Racking up the numbers in California and New York is all well and good but, because of the electoral college, it matters not.

By the same token Florida could have gone the other way. The way in which the votes have been counted have made the election appear closer than it was. Having said that it would seem that many presidential elections are close.

At least we are not talking about voter suppression tactics by the Republicans.

Just checked and there have only been three tighter races than this in the past 100 years of US Presidential elections:

Biden won by around 45k votes combined in three key states that got him over the line (could still come down a little; might expand if Trump doesn't win NC).

Kennedy won in 1960 by around 40k votes combined in three key states that got him over the line...though there were plenty of close state races when he won the election.

Carter beat Ford in 1976 by around 18k votes combined in two key states that got him over the line.

Bush beat Gore in 2000 by a few hundred votes in Florida...though if Al Gore had won his home state of Tennessee there wouldn't have been such a fuss.

This is a case where there is a bit of truth on both sides - Biden has won the popular vote by quite a substantial distance (going to end up close to 6 million), but because of the quirks of the electoral college and the distribution of the votes, the election has swung on c45000 votes (Biden isn't taking NC unless something VERY strange happens). As Duty put above, not quite the closest ever, and a bit tighter than Trump's election in 2016 in terms of the votes at the State level.

Of course, nothing is ever likely to match 2000, where GWB officially (i.e. what was certified for the purposes of the Electoral College) beat Gore by 537 votes - there's plenty of doubt as to what a full recount would have shown; some projections suggest that had Florida proceeded with the partial recounts that Gore wanted and that were underway (i.e. the one stopped by the Supreme Court*), he'd have still fallen short by about 200 votes, but a full recount may well have put him ahead by somewhere between 400 and 1500 votes. Of course these numbers are estimates and projections based on limited sample recounting, so the absolute truth is unknown. Oh, and Bush won 271 electoral college votes to Gore's 266 (with one abstention) so any one state flipping to Gore would have made the difference; Gore won the national popular vote by about 500K, so about 0.5% - much closer than either 2016 or 2020, and a margin where it doesn't seem unreasonable that the EC system might give a different victor, especially given the wafer-thin margin..

* There actually was a reasonably arguable legal basis for the Court's judgement that the partial recount was unconstitutional because votes weren't being treated equally. The bigger controversy was because of their pragmatic decision (and 5:4 margin, rather than 7:2 as with the first art of the decision) that the recounts should be terminated because of a lack of time to complete them before the Florida Electoral College was finalised, rather than stipulating that an equitable recount be carried out.

On a related subject there is a CNN video where they have included a whole bunch of clips of Republican commentators from 4 years ago supporting the voting system and claiming the Democrats were trying to undermine the results.

Duty281 wrote:Just checked and there have only been three tighter races than this in the past 100 years of US Presidential elections:

Biden won by around 45k votes combined in three key states that got him over the line (could still come down a little; might expand if Trump doesn't win NC).

Kennedy won in 1960 by around 40k votes combined in three key states that got him over the line...though there were plenty of close state races when he won the election.

Carter beat Ford in 1976 by around 18k votes combined in two key states that got him over the line.

Bush beat Gore in 2000 by a few hundred votes in Florida...though if Al Gore had won his home state of Tennessee there wouldn't have been such a fuss.

Yes very true......Less than 1% swings in Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin put Trump close to over...One of the closest elections I can remember.

1.5% swing in Michigan finishes the job..

For a President fighting awful ratings and Covid its shocking he came so close.

There is a kind of conviction politics going on in the USA (and closer to home) where it seems for a certain group of people that the worst thing in the world, the one thing they cannot deal with, is the idea that they might just be wrong.

lostinwales wrote:There is a kind of conviction politics going on in the USA (and closer to home) where it seems for a certain group of people that the worst thing in the world, the one thing they cannot deal with, is the idea that they might just be wrong.

People vote, in the main, for the same party they've always done. In addition, the divisiveness of everything means that to criticise Trump is to criticise them as a Republican. The two aren't (or shouldn't be) the same, but people are so entrenched now that no-one is going to listen (and they'd have to admit they wrong as well). Alternatively, and this is a kicker, maybe all of those Trump supporters actually do believe in pretty much everything he says and the America he claims to represent?

So trump still hasn't conceded even though it's a week since the race was called for Biden and 3 days since the final states were called.

Apparently, Trump's administration and their supporters have so far filed 32 law suits. 11 are still to be ruled on, 20 dismissed and a partial success in 1 which allowed poll watchers to stand a bit closer at the count in Pa...

State Secretaries of State and that bastion of Democrat-supporting liberals the Department of Homeland Security all asserting that this was a secure election free from fraud*

* So far, one proven case where a Trump voter completed and posted ballots both for themselves and his dead mother.

The 'list' of dead voters is almost entirely conflation of two people with the same names, dates of birth and state of residence, one living and rightly voting and one deceased. There was apparently one very elderly voter who submitted a postal ballot a few weeks before the election but died before 3 November, and a couple of instances where people erroneously submitted ballots under the wrong name (John Smith jr completing the ballot under the name John Smith sr rather than his own).

None of this is new - a quick google has brought up the linked document:
Voter Fraud report

Makes no sense for Trump to concede if he still has pending law suits. The election, despite the mainstream media pretending otherwise, isn't over until the 6th January when Congress formally declare the winner.

True. If Trump wants to continue looking like a delusional jackass for a while longer, it's up to him. Not allowing Biden to see the security briefs threatens US security but his paranoia and fragile ego are way beyond such petty concerns as the safety of the people he was elected to protect.

To get the 37 electoral votes he needs, Trump has to somehow win Pennsylvania plus two of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. He can continue to d!ck about if he wants, but it's not going to get him anywhere.

JuliusHMarx wrote:True. If Trump wants to continue looking like a delusional jackass for a while longer, it's up to him. Not allowing Biden to see the security briefs threatens US security but his paranoia and fragile ego are way beyond such petty concerns as the safety of the people he was elected to protect.

More obvious problem even than that. Hand over on pandemic management isn't happening.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:To get the 37 electoral votes he needs, Trump has to somehow win Pennsylvania plus two of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. He can continue to d!ck about if he wants, but it's not going to get him anywhere.

If the alleged fraud is as widespread as Trump and his team say it is, those four states would go Republican at a canter and would be just the tip of the iceberg.

All 50 states voted for Trump. FACT.

Duty281 wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:To get the 37 electoral votes he needs, Trump has to somehow win Pennsylvania plus two of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. He can continue to d!ck about if he wants, but it's not going to get him anywhere.

If the alleged fraud is as widespread as Trump and his team say it is, those four states would go Republican at a canter and would be just the tip of the iceberg.

If there was any evidence of this surely they'd have produced it by now though?

It's also telling that what the campaign are saying to the press and what is being said in court (i.e. under oath) is completely different.

Also I feel worth noting that several suits have been thrown out due to absence of basic paperwork that would lead to most decent law firms firing the associate responsible. Which says rather a lot about the quality of legal representation that the campaign have got hold of.

Trump's team aren't even alleging fraud in Pennsylvania at this point, they're just trying to get votes thrown out where someone didn't sign the right envelope or something.

And just so they can desperately try and get into recount range. Any delusions anyone had of Trump as a patriot can be dispelled after he lets a virus run loose while he has a temper tantrum over losing

Duty281 wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:To get the 37 electoral votes he needs, Trump has to somehow win Pennsylvania plus two of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. He can continue to d!ck about if he wants, but it's not going to get him anywhere.

If the alleged fraud is as widespread as Trump and his team say it is, those four states would go Republican at a canter and would be just the tip of the iceberg.

Turn it up , Duty : you are not seriously suggesting the sort of nonsense Trump is spewing out on twitter has an ounce of credibility , are you ? All his lawsuits are getting thrown out in double quick time ; even if some of his claims had any basis in fact there is nothing to suggest enough votes would be affected to change the results. How far is Biden ahead now in PA ? 70,000 ? A few "late" ballots ain't changing that...

Point of logic : if there were large scale fraud perpetrated (ingeniously !) by evil democrat dark forces - would they not have made sure of the success they sought (but have not achieved) in the Senate and House votes too ? All in the same envelopes...

Trump knows he's toast. Has done for a week. All this BS is just about keeping his crazy fans fired up so the donations keep flowing in . That and the fact that he is psychologically incapable of admitting he has been defeated except by some nefarious piece of cheating...

If this was happening in, let's say, Bolivia or Peru, the US would be crying coup.

John Bolton yesterday: "Their basic argument is this was a conspiracy so vast and so successful that there's no evidence of it. Now if that's true, I really want to know who the people are who pulled this off. We need to hire them at the CIA."

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:John Bolton yesterday: "Their basic argument is this was a conspiracy so vast and so successful that there's no evidence of it. Now if that's true, I really want to know who the people are who pulled this off. We need to hire them at the CIA."

Duty will blame it on the EU and the migrants in small boats trying to cross the Channel.

Duty281 wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:To get the 37 electoral votes he needs, Trump has to somehow win Pennsylvania plus two of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. He can continue to d!ck about if he wants, but it's not going to get him anywhere.

If the alleged fraud is as widespread as Trump and his team say it is, those four states would go Republican at a canter and would be just the tip of the iceberg.

Seen the Georgia Republican Governer complaining about being put under pressure to throw out votes?

Also that most recent recount data shows hand recount matches the machines that Trump doesn't like

Apparently the Georgia recount has found about 2600 votes that were missed from the original count. From a Trump-favouring County, so expected to narrow Biden's lead by about  800. Otherwise, the reports suggest no significant change, and certainly not enough to affect the overall outcome in the state

Useful link regarding the lawsuits - Financial Times, so not a paper you'd expect to have a Democrat bias:

FT Trump Lawsuits

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:To get the 37 electoral votes he needs, Trump has to somehow win Pennsylvania plus two of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. He can continue to d!ck about if he wants, but it's not going to get him anywhere.

If the alleged fraud is as widespread as Trump and his team say it is, those four states would go Republican at a canter and would be just the tip of the iceberg.

If there was any evidence of this surely they'd have produced it by now though?

It's also telling that what the campaign are saying to the press and what is being said in court (i.e. under oath) is completely different.

Also I feel worth noting that several suits have been thrown out due to absence of basic paperwork that would lead to most decent law firms firing the associate responsible. Which says rather a lot about the quality of legal representation that the campaign have got hold of.

Probably. Their main fixation at the moment appears to be the Dominion voting machines. If there's any issue with this, and I haven't seen any evidence to suggest so, it would flip the election.

alfie wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:To get the 37 electoral votes he needs, Trump has to somehow win Pennsylvania plus two of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. He can continue to d!ck about if he wants, but it's not going to get him anywhere.

If the alleged fraud is as widespread as Trump and his team say it is, those four states would go Republican at a canter and would be just the tip of the iceberg.

Turn it up , Duty :  you are not seriously suggesting the sort of nonsense Trump is spewing out on twitter has an ounce of credibility , are you ?  All his lawsuits are getting thrown out in double quick time ; even if some of his claims had any basis in fact there is nothing to suggest enough votes would be affected to change the results.  How far is Biden ahead now in PA ? 70,000 ?  A few "late" ballots ain't changing that...

Point of logic : if there were large scale fraud perpetrated (ingeniously !) by evil democrat dark forces - would they not have made sure of the success they sought (but have not achieved) in the Senate and House votes too ? All in the same envelopes...

Trump knows he's toast. Has done for a week.  All this BS is just about keeping his crazy fans fired up so the donations keep flowing in .  That and the fact that he is psychologically incapable of admitting he has been defeated except by some nefarious piece of cheating...

No, I'm not suggesting that. I'm just pointing out that if there were actually fraud per Trump's accusations, getting the electoral votes he needs flipped as a result of that would be no drama.

And to your second point - who knows?

Are we really giving credence to IF's with no evidence now?

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:John Bolton yesterday: "Their basic argument is this was a conspiracy so vast and so successful that there's no evidence of it. Now if that's true, I really want to know who the people are who pulled this off. We need to hire them at the CIA."

John Bolton?! Good grief. One of the best things Trump did was not go to war with Iran which Bolton, a war mongering oaf who makes Churchill seem positively pacifistic, desired greatly.

Still, with Biden about to take charge, the new war will be just around the corner with Britain likely to be dragged in.

lostinwales wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:To get the 37 electoral votes he needs, Trump has to somehow win Pennsylvania plus two of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. He can continue to d!ck about if he wants, but it's not going to get him anywhere.

If the alleged fraud is as widespread as Trump and his team say it is, those four states would go Republican at a canter and would be just the tip of the iceberg.

Seen the Georgia Republican Governer complaining about being put under pressure to throw out votes?

Also that most recent recount data shows hand recount matches the machines that Trump doesn't like

I haven't, but I always laugh when I think of Brian Kemp.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q1cfjh6VfE

dummy_half wrote:Apparently the Georgia recount has found about 2600 votes that were missed from the original count. From a Trump-favouring County, so expected to narrow Biden's lead by about  800. Otherwise, the reports suggest no significant change, and certainly not enough to affect the overall outcome in the state

Useful link regarding the lawsuits - Financial Times, so not a paper you'd expect to have a Democrat bias:

FT Trump Lawsuits

Well I certainly wouldn't expect them to have a Republican bias, either!

Duty281 wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:To get the 37 electoral votes he needs, Trump has to somehow win Pennsylvania plus two of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. He can continue to d!ck about if he wants, but it's not going to get him anywhere.

If the alleged fraud is as widespread as Trump and his team say it is, those four states would go Republican at a canter and would be just the tip of the iceberg.

If a wingnut, or bunch of wingnuts as is the case here, allege anything, it probably behoves the rest of the World to take it w/ a pinch of salt. Still, guess the farce has to play out. If his cult followers want to give him money to syphon into his own pockets or some fantasy PAC, entirely up to them. They're likely beyond help.

Duty281 wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:John Bolton yesterday: "Their basic argument is this was a conspiracy so vast and so successful that there's no evidence of it. Now if that's true, I really want to know who the people are who pulled this off. We need to hire them at the CIA."

John Bolton?! Good grief. One of the best things Trump did was not go to war with Iran which Bolton, a war mongering oaf who makes Churchill seem positively pacifistic, desired greatly.

Still, with Biden about to take charge, the new war will be just around the corner with Britain likely to be dragged in.

Yes, John Bolton. Even he can see how far-fetched this all is.

And the less said about Iran the better:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-54972269

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:John Bolton yesterday: "Their basic argument is this was a conspiracy so vast and so successful that there's no evidence of it. Now if that's true, I really want to know who the people are who pulled this off. We need to hire them at the CIA."

John Bolton?! Good grief. One of the best things Trump did was not go to war with Iran which Bolton, a war mongering oaf who makes Churchill seem positively pacifistic, desired greatly.

Still, with Biden about to take charge, the new war will be just around the corner with Britain likely to be dragged in.

Yes, John Bolton. Even he can see how far-fetched this all is.

And the less said about Iran the better:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-54972269

No, what Bolton is doing is exercising his own transparent bias. If Trump had kept Bolton on in his role in the government, and if Trump had gone to war against Iran and North Korea, then Bolton would be calling this election as a fix, a travesty, a disgrace to democracy etc.

Right now, though, Bolton despises Trump so is happy to wound him ever further.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:To get the 37 electoral votes he needs, Trump has to somehow win Pennsylvania plus two of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. He can continue to d!ck about if he wants, but it's not going to get him anywhere.

If the alleged fraud is as widespread as Trump and his team say it is, those four states would go Republican at a canter and would be just the tip of the iceberg.

If a wingnut, or bunch of wingnuts as is the case here, allege anything, it probably behoves the rest of the World to take it w/ a pinch of salt. Still, guess the farce has to play out. If his cult followers want to give him money to syphon into his own pockets or some fantasy PAC, entirely up to them. They're likely beyond help.

Absolutely, pinch of salt. I've seen some unusual patterns and odd numbers in this election, but that's all. That can happen in both honest and dishonest elections. I'm perfectly happy for any auditing and recounting to be done to ensure the election has been conducted in a completely honest way. Once it's been completed, if Biden's still the winner then he should be declared as such and we can all move on.

Duty281 wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:John Bolton yesterday: "Their basic argument is this was a conspiracy so vast and so successful that there's no evidence of it. Now if that's true, I really want to know who the people are who pulled this off. We need to hire them at the CIA."

John Bolton?! Good grief. One of the best things Trump did was not go to war with Iran which Bolton, a war mongering oaf who makes Churchill seem positively pacifistic, desired greatly.

Still, with Biden about to take charge, the new war will be just around the corner with Britain likely to be dragged in.

Yes, John Bolton. Even he can see how far-fetched this all is.

And the less said about Iran the better:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-54972269

No, what Bolton is doing is exercising his own transparent bias. If Trump had kept Bolton on in his role in the government, and if Trump had gone to war against Iran and North Korea, then Bolton would be calling this election as a fix, a travesty, a disgrace to democracy etc.

Right now, though, Bolton despises Trump so is happy to wound him ever further.

Oooh, that's a bit rich for my tastes.

Over 70% of Republicans think Trump lost because of cheating...according to polls..

Considering the second amendment was designed to fight against political tyranny (Subjective thing)and Republicans with guns go hand in hand it could be a volatile time..

Not that I think Trump won for a minute.

US is in for a turbulent four years and it's a worry..

Hope I'm wrong.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Over 70% of Republicans think Trump lost because of cheating...according to polls..

Considering the second amendment was designed to fight against political tyranny (Subjective thing)and Republicans with guns go hand in hand it could be a volatile time..

Not that I think Trump won for a minute.

US is in for a turbulent four years and it's a worry..

Hope I'm wrong.

Can't be any worse than another 4 years of Trump.

You probably don't know what is in the second amendment and I can't be bothered explaining it.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You probably don't know what is in the second amendment and I can't be bothered explaining it.

Problem is that it was written so long ago, it's hard to agree how to interpret it in the modern age.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You probably don't know what is in the second amendment and I can't be bothered explaining it.

What an unnecessarily patronising post. No need for this, mate.

I know what it says and I'm not going to explain it other than to say it's a load of f*cking macho bullsh1t nonsense hiding behind a constitutional right that might have been relevant 250 years ago but which has about as much relevance now as the Old Testament does and that it's a right that's clung onto by a mind-numbingly high number of morons who lack the cognitive ability to have any thought that it isn't driven by a form of religious fervour.

Anyone that sees what happened at Sandy Hook (any any number of other mass shootings) and doesn't want much tighter gun controls is a c*nt. Without exception.