2020 Presidential Election (All Serious POVs Welcome)

[Jeff Van Gully]

Yeah. That's not islamophobic, though. Not too worried about that.

Like Christianity, there are religions that have extremists who want to do harm to others. They often overshadow the vast number of those practicing the religion who are peaceful and loving people.

But I'm sure if you asked how she felt about Christian extremists who want non believers hurt, dead, etc, she'd condemn them and call them terrorists - Timothy McVeigh

I would put money on her hating the westboro Baptist Church as well

Radical islam would be similar to saying radical Christians. They exist, and I don't like people who want to do harm to others.

Not sure I like the term radical islam tho.

i get that. i think when people see that, they also see things that have been used as rhetorical and legislative vehicles for islamophobia. that movement to demand the use of the term "radical islam" was a classic play to otherize. she didn't have to choose that hill to fight on or jump into that bucket. i understand why people are wary. i don't love to see that kind of language and approach myself, even in the context of what's necessary to keep us safe. i think there are ways to do that without even opening the door to mass vilification, dehumanization, or painting with a broad brush. in tulsi's case, she's got to be EXTRA careful given what we know about her family/religious background. you also don't want to fall into the bucket that co-opts all servicepeople as that way, because they aren't.

i prefer leaders who are much more careful about that. i am a believer in the power of rhetoric.

Precisely. Seeing her wanting it called that (and maybe she's changed her stance on that as well) puts a bad taste in my mouth.

But again, overall, she was my favorite candidate and. I'm bummed she wasn't brought in to help with Biden, since he got the nod from the democrats.

It was nice being civil with you, even though we disagree on a bunch of things, JVG.

likewise. and honestly, it's been more than civility for me. i've enjoyed speaking with you. and talking to you led me to learn some things today. that's what it's all about! open minds and hearts, man.

[Clyde_Style]

And as for anyone who is anti-Trump and contemplating casting a vote for anyone other than Biden, consider this:

The Democratic Party is already trending left in recent elections.

More left wing candidates are vying for public office as registered Democrats.

The Democratic policy platform is now heavily modified by the input of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. We're talking major changes that brings the party to the left right now.

The historical zeitgeist strongly favors putting our weight behind this leftwards progression within the Democratic Party. When have you ever seen this confluence of factors in your lifetime? You haven't! Yet some of you are talking about squandering what may be your greatest single opportunity to mold a major party in the peoples' image. You throw this away you may never get a chance and may never have a third party with the power to make those changes.

Don't throw this chance away. And don't vote for a fringe candidate which is the same thing as voting to elect Trump. That's not a protest vote. That's you explicitly stating you don't care if fascists take over. That's pretty evil and spiteful if you do that. Do the right thing and support the left that is burrowing into the party and changing it as we speak.

The Democratic Party has morphed considerably over time. It is not a monolith like the GOP. It is a much more inclusive and messy party with lots of factions competing for attention. But it is movable. Be courageous and move it. Don't take the coward's option and support a life of tyranny under fascism which is exactly what you'll be doing if don't vote for Biden this election.

This feeling of being rejected by the system is a trap. That's what the right wing demagogues want you to feel. They want to feel like you were born into a cruel system run by Democrats that have betrayed you. That's the goal. You're being manipulated.

If the people elect the right candidates and force the Democrats into reforming campaign finance reforms and that brings in another wave of progressive candidates you can transform this country in a decade. But if you throw away this historical opportunity now you may never get another chance to produce change all because you're so alienated that you can't get on board with anyone because it is an "evil system". This is just wrong.

All systems have the ability to get corrupted. But we have a good constitutional democratic structure to work with. It is very pliable and subject to change. If you let fascists dismantle that you will have nothing left but unrelenting oppression. There are no do-overs. You lose this election and there will be no more elections. Democracy will be gone. Don't enable that outcome. There will be no more left wing, just white nationalism and murder. Pick the right side.

[Stannis]

According to the polls 15% of us are Libertarians.

[bishnykfan]

What i don't get... Is that from what I watched, the agenda from the right is "if you want safety, more police, controlling the riots, stop illegals, more freedoms, etc. you need to elect Trump".

Which I don't get because... Trump is already in office now. He has the power. Even if I was on the right, I would say Trump failed me. Especially now because it's like he's running a campaign for election, not re-election.

Correct me if I'm wrong but can the federal government go into states to stop the rioting without the permission of the state? I mean, when he sent them into Portland to protect a federal building there was a lot of criticism? If the Governor of the state where the riots are happening, which are mostly run by democrats, doesn't ask for assistance, what can he do?

[Stannis]

What i don't get... Is that from what I watched, the agenda from the right is "if you want safety, more police, controlling the riots, stop illegals, more freedoms, etc. you need to elect Trump".

Which I don't get because... Trump is already in office now. He has the power. Even if I was on the right, I would say Trump failed me. Especially now because it's like he's running a campaign for election, not re-election.

Correct me if I'm wrong but can the federal government go into states to stop the rioting without the permission of the state? I mean, when he sent them into Portland to protect a federal building there was a lot of criticism? If the Governor of the state where the riots are happening, which are mostly run by democrats, doesn't ask for assistance, what can he do?

via the The Insurrection Act, I believe he can. Last time it was used without state acceptance was by JFK in the 60s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act_of_1807#Invocations_of_the_act

He hasn't used it yet. My point is, If he gets 4 more years, I don't see the appeal when he hasn't done it in his first term. Yea, there's going to be backlash. But I'm not sure what his plan is to control the destruction if not using that act now?

[Clyde_Style]

What i don't get... Is that from what I watched, the agenda from the right is "if you want safety, more police, controlling the riots, stop illegals, more freedoms, etc. you need to elect Trump".

Which I don't get because... Trump is already in office now. He has the power. Even if I was on the right, I would say Trump failed me. Especially now because it's like he's running a campaign for election, not re-election.

Correct me if I'm wrong but can the federal government go into states to stop the rioting without the permission of the state? I mean, when he sent them into Portland to protect a federal building there was a lot of criticism? If the Governor of the state where the riots are happening, which are mostly run by democrats, doesn't ask for assistance, what can he do?

via the The Insurrection Act, I believe he can. Last time it was used without state acceptance was by JFK in the 60s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act_of_1807#Invocations_of_the_act

He hasn't used it yet. My point is, If he gets 4 more years, I don't see the appeal when he hasn't done it in his first term. Yea, there's going to be backlash. But I'm not sure what his plan is to control the destruction if not using that act now?

One of the treasured tenets of Republicanism has been State's Rights which is married to the Less Federal Government theme (not what the GOP has usually done, but they spin it that way to indoctrinate their supporters).

Trump blew that all up by ignoring Governors' stated wishes.

What that does now is expose who actually supports States Rights vs. who will voluntarily surrender that belief to support a fascist federal government. The hypocrisy of supporting Trump now if you've previously espoused lessening the reach of the federal government is now in very stark terms.

Trump is a fascist. He's stupid so he doesn't even understand civics, but because of who he is and because of how the GOP morphed into a cult to support him unequivocably, that's where we are with an insane narcissist with no comprehension of government boundaries or the rights of people or their local governance.

Re-elect Trump and you'll see him using troops like a child with weapons. A mayor flips off Trump and he'll put your city under siege. That's where we're at already and it will get much worse with unlimited powers to disappear anyone who opposes or offends him.

[bishnykfan]

What i don't get... Is that from what I watched, the agenda from the right is "if you want safety, more police, controlling the riots, stop illegals, more freedoms, etc. you need to elect Trump".

Which I don't get because... Trump is already in office now. He has the power. Even if I was on the right, I would say Trump failed me. Especially now because it's like he's running a campaign for election, not re-election.

Correct me if I'm wrong but can the federal government go into states to stop the rioting without the permission of the state? I mean, when he sent them into Portland to protect a federal building there was a lot of criticism? If the Governor of the state where the riots are happening, which are mostly run by democrats, doesn't ask for assistance, what can he do?

via the The Insurrection Act, I believe he can. Last time it was used without state acceptance was by JFK in the 60s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act_of_1807#Invocations_of_the_act

He hasn't used it yet. My point is, If he gets 4 more years, I don't see the appeal when he hasn't done it in his first term. Yea, there's going to be backlash. But I'm not sure what his plan is to control the destruction if not using that act now?

I know the Insurrection Act is a last ditch resort. I can't imagine him using it now no matter how bad a city gets with all of the "fascist" talk that is out there. Just sending federal officers into Portland was denounced throughout most of the media. I believe he sent officers into Minneapolis and Kenosha and sent people to Chicago also after the governors/mayors asked for help and things seemed to get better there as far as the rioting went? Honestly, it would be nice if both "sides" took politics out of the equation and actually tried to help the people who are seeing violence in their cities.

I don't know what the plan is but it's easy for him to claim that he's the law and order choice if the other candidate/party isn't as forceful in their support for law enforcement or their denunciation of the rioting.

[Clyde_Style]

Correct me if I'm wrong but can the federal government go into states to stop the rioting without the permission of the state? I mean, when he sent them into Portland to protect a federal building there was a lot of criticism? If the Governor of the state where the riots are happening, which are mostly run by democrats, doesn't ask for assistance, what can he do?

via the The Insurrection Act, I believe he can. Last time it was used without state acceptance was by JFK in the 60s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act_of_1807#Invocations_of_the_act

He hasn't used it yet. My point is, If he gets 4 more years, I don't see the appeal when he hasn't done it in his first term. Yea, there's going to be backlash. But I'm not sure what his plan is to control the destruction if not using that act now?

I know the Insurrection Act is a last ditch resort. I can't imagine him using it now no matter how bad a city gets with all of the "fascist" talk that is out there. Just sending federal officers into Portland was denounced throughout most of the media. I believe he sent officers into Minneapolis and Kenosha and sent people to Chicago also after the governors/mayors asked for help and things seemed to get better there as far as the rioting went? Honestly, it would be nice if both "sides" took politics out of the equation and actually tried to help the people who are seeing violence in their cities.

I don't know what the plan is but it's easy for him to claim that he's the law and order choice if the other candidate/party isn't as forceful in their support for law enforcement or their denunciation of the rioting.

Biden explicity stated yesterday he spoke to the Blake family, that what the cops did to him was awful, that he wants to end systemic racism and that he actively supports continued protests without burning down neighborhoods. There was no equivocation on any point. He is clearly stating he is going to fight police brutality, but that he does not condone violence as the response or the solution.

He did answer everything

[Capn'O]

A reminder that the issue in Portland was twofold. Not only were federal "troops?" sent in without consulting local and state authorities but the forces sent weren't even identifiable in any way.

[mpharris36]

Correct me if I'm wrong but can the federal government go into states to stop the rioting without the permission of the state? I mean, when he sent them into Portland to protect a federal building there was a lot of criticism? If the Governor of the state where the riots are happening, which are mostly run by democrats, doesn't ask for assistance, what can he do?

via the The Insurrection Act, I believe he can. Last time it was used without state acceptance was by JFK in the 60s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act_of_1807#Invocations_of_the_act

He hasn't used it yet. My point is, If he gets 4 more years, I don't see the appeal when he hasn't done it in his first term. Yea, there's going to be backlash. But I'm not sure what his plan is to control the destruction if not using that act now?

I know the Insurrection Act is a last ditch resort. I can't imagine him using it now no matter how bad a city gets with all of the "fascist" talk that is out there. Just sending federal officers into Portland was denounced throughout most of the media. I believe he sent officers into Minneapolis and Kenosha and sent people to Chicago also after the governors/mayors asked for help and things seemed to get better there as far as the rioting went? Honestly, it would be nice if both "sides" took politics out of the equation and actually tried to help the people who are seeing violence in their cities.

I don't know what the plan is but it's easy for him to claim that he's the law and order choice if the other candidate/party isn't as forceful in their support for law enforcement or their denunciation of the rioting.

Agreed Bish. It's a situation where if he does it without the concent of the leaders of those cities (who are all democratic) he will be labeled a facist but when he doesn't do it people say this is his america with the looting and rioting.

Like him or hate him at least he has offered those cities help with the federal govt if they want it.

[GONYK]

I remember there being some degree of discussion around race and racial tension in America in the past, but I don't remember mass protests and riots that necessitate federal intervention in multiple states before.

Definitely don't remember major sporting events being canceled.


I don't think examining the outcome without looking at the factors that led to it will yield the full picture.

[Clyde_Style]

via the The Insurrection Act, I believe he can. Last time it was used without state acceptance was by JFK in the 60s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act_of_1807#Invocations_of_the_act

He hasn't used it yet. My point is, If he gets 4 more years, I don't see the appeal when he hasn't done it in his first term. Yea, there's going to be backlash. But I'm not sure what his plan is to control the destruction if not using that act now?

I know the Insurrection Act is a last ditch resort. I can't imagine him using it now no matter how bad a city gets with all of the "fascist" talk that is out there. Just sending federal officers into Portland was denounced throughout most of the media. I believe he sent officers into Minneapolis and Kenosha and sent people to Chicago also after the governors/mayors asked for help and things seemed to get better there as far as the rioting went? Honestly, it would be nice if both "sides" took politics out of the equation and actually tried to help the people who are seeing violence in their cities.

I don't know what the plan is but it's easy for him to claim that he's the law and order choice if the other candidate/party isn't as forceful in their support for law enforcement or their denunciation of the rioting.

Agreed Bish. It's a situation where if he does it without the concent of the leaders of those cities (who are all democratic) he will be labeled a facist but when he doesn't do it people say this is his america with the looting and rioting.

Like him or hate him at least he has offered those cities help with the federal govt if they want it.

He sent in unmarked border patrol employees in unmarked Enterprise Rental Vans who proceeded to beat protestors without physical provocation and to grab people off the streets without identifying themselves or reading them their rights and throwing them into the vans.

Is that the help you're talking about?

[bishnykfan]

A reminder that the issue in Portland was twofold. Not only were federal "troops?" sent in without consulting local and state authorities but the forces sent weren't even identifiable in any way.

I know that you're out in that area, were they sent in to protect the Federal building that was under siege and has it gotten better since they were pulled out like it was supposed to?

[Capn'O]

A reminder that the issue in Portland was twofold. Not only were federal "troops?" sent in without consulting local and state authorities but the forces sent weren't even identifiable in any way.

I know that you're out in that area, were they sent in to protect the Federal building that was under siege and has it gotten better since they were pulled out like it was supposed to?

Well, that was the rub. The protests had started to peter out and went off the handle again when unmarked feds came in. I understand the desire to protect the building but how they did it was totally poking the bear. It brought out a LOT more people and really escalated the matter.

I honestly don't make my way into the downtown area much. It's... not really the selling point of the city frankly. But my understanding is that the protests have more or less whittled back to the more radical factions in the city - a few hundred a night - since Feds became less prominently involved (they're still here).

[HighRyzer83]

I dont really do politics but Joe Biden seems like a wack ass option

But anybody better than Trump

I wanted Tulsi. If Biden had picked her as VP I would jump on board with him. Chances are Biden is going to be mentally incapacitated soon, so Tulsi would've taken over.

I love her in more ways than 1. The DNC is already trying to blacklist her. To not have her speak at the convention is a travesty. I'll never support either party.. eff that.

I'm with you %100
I also liked yang. No emotional pandering just facts and a steady plan.

[Stannis]

via the The Insurrection Act, I believe he can. Last time it was used without state acceptance was by JFK in the 60s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act_of_1807#Invocations_of_the_act

He hasn't used it yet. My point is, If he gets 4 more years, I don't see the appeal when he hasn't done it in his first term. Yea, there's going to be backlash. But I'm not sure what his plan is to control the destruction if not using that act now?

I know the Insurrection Act is a last ditch resort. I can't imagine him using it now no matter how bad a city gets with all of the "fascist" talk that is out there. Just sending federal officers into Portland was denounced throughout most of the media. I believe he sent officers into Minneapolis and Kenosha and sent people to Chicago also after the governors/mayors asked for help and things seemed to get better there as far as the rioting went? Honestly, it would be nice if both "sides" took politics out of the equation and actually tried to help the people who are seeing violence in their cities.

I don't know what the plan is but it's easy for him to claim that he's the law and order choice if the other candidate/party isn't as forceful in their support for law enforcement or their denunciation of the rioting.

Agreed Bish. It's a situation where if he does it without the concent of the leaders of those cities (who are all democratic) he will be labeled a facist but when he doesn't do it people say this is his america with the looting and rioting.

Like him or hate him at least he has offered those cities help with the federal govt if they want it.

Kinda replying to both of you...

Agreed it would be nice to completely leave politics out of it. But my point still stands. If I'm a voter worried about safety, I like my chances with Biden over Trump. Trump is just fueling these race wars.

To say he isn't sending aid because he will be called a fascist is pretty weak. Getting criticized by the media is part of being the president. It comes with the territory. If he's worried about that, that just tells me he's worried about his re-election, not his country. And/or he's too concerned about what the news says about him. I know major news outlets are garbage. I don't watch them. But if a president is going to let them dictate what they do, hard pass for me.

As far as the police and national guard... I can't say they were doing a good job. It's bad enough small businesses went under during the virus. But many more were destroyed by looters and rioters. But I honestly don't see why more police aren't walling off these businesses. Instead they are lined up in formation against the protesters like it's a scene from Dark Knight Rises. Let the protesters protest. But protect the businesses and people from looters and rioters.

[mpharris36]

I know the Insurrection Act is a last ditch resort. I can't imagine him using it now no matter how bad a city gets with all of the "fascist" talk that is out there. Just sending federal officers into Portland was denounced throughout most of the media. I believe he sent officers into Minneapolis and Kenosha and sent people to Chicago also after the governors/mayors asked for help and things seemed to get better there as far as the rioting went? Honestly, it would be nice if both "sides" took politics out of the equation and actually tried to help the people who are seeing violence in their cities.

I don't know what the plan is but it's easy for him to claim that he's the law and order choice if the other candidate/party isn't as forceful in their support for law enforcement or their denunciation of the rioting.

Agreed Bish. It's a situation where if he does it without the concent of the leaders of those cities (who are all democratic) he will be labeled a facist but when he doesn't do it people say this is his america with the looting and rioting.

Like him or hate him at least he has offered those cities help with the federal govt if they want it.

Kinda replying to both of you...

Agreed it would be nice to completely leave politics out of it. But my point still stands. If I'm a voter worried about safety, I like my chances with Biden over Trump. Trump is just fueling these race wars.

To say he isn't sending aid because he will be called a fascist is pretty weak. Getting criticized by the media is part of being the president. It comes with the territory. If he's worried about that, that just tells me he's worried about his re-election, not his country. And/or he's too concerned about what the news says about him. I know major news outlets are garbage. I don't watch them. But if a president is going to let them dictate what they do, hard pass for me.

As far as the police and national guard... I can't say they were doing a good job. It's bad enough small businesses went under during the virus. But many more were destroyed by looters and rioters. But I honestly don't see why more police aren't walling off these businesses. Instead they are lined up in formation against the protesters like it's a scene from Dark Knight Rises. Let the protesters protest. But protect the businesses and people from looters and rioters.

Its election year everyone is worried about public perception even if Trump doesn't give a crap about the media he is being advised and knows CNN will plaster that sh*t all on the news that he will have his goonies come knock down your door and steal you out of your home.

Also we will just agree to disagree on which president people would feel safer with. I would never move to a dem run city. My business would be burning down and the people in charge of those cities would be telling me that we need to let people vent. So why would I also want someone I specifcally think has no backbone protecting me?

Its not like that the insurrection act is commonly used. And I doubt we would see a democratic pres use it now. Last one to use it was Lyndon B. Johnson which was state requested.

[Pointgod]

What i don't get... Is that from what I watched, the agenda from the right is "if you want safety, more police, controlling the riots, stop illegals, more freedoms, etc. you need to elect Trump".

Which I don't get because... Trump is already in office now. He has the power. Even if I was on the right, I would say Trump failed me. Especially now because it's like he's running a campaign for election, not re-election.

Because the people that Trump appeals to are **** morons. He’s basically saying elect me to prevent the hellscape that’s currently occurring under the leadership of......me?

All law and order to Republicans is to scare white people into keeping the black people in check. He’s running a blatantly racist strategy. It was used by Nixon in the 60’s during the civil rights marches (the rhetoric hasn’t changed from Trumps) and it was used by wealthy slave owners during emancipation. I was watching the news and they compared Trump’s law and order rhetoric from the RNC 2016 to the 2020 RNC. Literally nothing has changed. It’s the same message that America is a hellscape their only he can prevent.

I’d like to see someone ask him what he would if he was re-elected that he can’t do now as President and watch his brain melt in real time. He’d either say something like “Just wait and see” and move onto the next question. It’s only effective though because you’ll never go break betting for racism in America.

we not doing that in this thread. -JVG

[GONYK]

How many Dem run cities were being burned down under Obama or Bush?

[mpharris36]

How many Dem run cities were being burned down under Obama or Bush?

Baltimore and Ferguson come to mind. I don't think you will like my answer but due to the pandemic and this being an election year I do think people are getting paid to incite a lot of these riots. These young Antifa dudes are paid to incite chaos.