2020 Presidential Election (All Serious POVs Welcome)

[Clyde_Style]

But, yeah, let's push the far right's agenda and claim this is the fault of Democrats. Well done guys, do their work for them

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[Clyde_Style]

Trump tweeted LIBERATE! and the militias showed up on the steps of state capitols dressed up in their war gear, locked and loaded

We have white vigilantes being goaded on by Trump and celebrated by the right wingers when they commit homicide and the problem is Democratic mayors?

Any similar group of armed black men congregated on the steps of a state capitol building would now end in a slaughter sanctioned by the government

But it appears to be OK for whites to flex with their guns and ammo

But What About the Democrat Mayors? GTFO

[Clyde_Style]

An excerpt from the previously cited article:

In June 2020, three Wilmington, North Carolina, police officers were fired when a routine audit of car camera recordings uncovered conversations in which the officers used racial epithets, criticized a magistrate and the police chief in frankly racist terms, and talked about shooting Black people, including a Black police officer. One officer said that he could not wait for a declaration of martial law so they could go out and “slaughter” Black people. He also announced his intent to buy an assault rifle in preparation for a civil war that would “wipe ’em off the [expletive] map.” The officers confirmed making the statements on the recording, but they claimed that they were not racist and were simply reacting to the stress of policing the protests following the killing of George Floyd. In addition to the officers’ dismissal, the police chief ordered his department to confer with the district attorney to review cases in which the officers appeared as witnesses for evidence of bias against offenders.

[BallSacBounce]

Moved this post to this thread from the Democrat Primary one.

Is this the beginning of a civil war? Scary **** man.

First Rittenhouse was stupidly chased and hunted down before defending himself with his rifle and now this.

WATCH: Man Shot and Killed in Portland Amid Riots, Civil Unrest

https://www.breitbart.com/social-justice/2020/08/29/watch-man-shot-and-killed-in-portland-amid-riots-civil-unrest/

According to the Oregonian, “The person lay in the street as police medics tended to their wounds. Next to the body was camouflage gear with infidel and thin blue line patches, which commonly indicate support for law enforcement. Police taped off the area.”

As the Associated Press reports:

The caravan of Trump supporters had gathered earlier in the day at a nearby mall and drove as a group to the heart of Portland. As they arrived in the city, protesters attempted to stop them by standing in the street and blocking bridges.

Videos from the scene showed sporadic fighting, as well as Trump supporters firing paintball pellets at opponents and using bear spray as counter-protesters threw things at the Trump caravan.

‘There have been some instances of violence between demonstrators and counterdemonstrators,’ Portland Police said via Twitter. ‘Officers have intervened and in some cases made arrests.’

It's getting hot, really hot.

[Pointgod]

For anyone in this thread supporting or thinking of voting for Trump. Why would they stop giving briefings on election interference? Think very carefully and critically about what you’re approving.

Read on Twitter

[Pointgod]

Moved this post to this thread from the Democrat Primary one.

Is this the beginning of a civil war? Scary **** man.

First Rittenhouse was stupidly chased and hunted down before defending himself with his rifle and now this.

WATCH: Man Shot and Killed in Portland Amid Riots, Civil Unrest

https://www.breitbart.com/social-justice/2020/08/29/watch-man-shot-and-killed-in-portland-amid-riots-civil-unrest/

According to the Oregonian, “The person lay in the street as police medics tended to their wounds. Next to the body was camouflage gear with infidel and thin blue line patches, which commonly indicate support for law enforcement. Police taped off the area.”

As the Associated Press reports:

The caravan of Trump supporters had gathered earlier in the day at a nearby mall and drove as a group to the heart of Portland. As they arrived in the city, protesters attempted to stop them by standing in the street and blocking bridges.

Videos from the scene showed sporadic fighting, as well as Trump supporters firing paintball pellets at opponents and using bear spray as counter-protesters threw things at the Trump caravan.

‘There have been some instances of violence between demonstrators and counterdemonstrators,’ Portland Police said via Twitter. ‘Officers have intervened and in some cases made arrests.’

It's getting hot, really hot.

The current occupant in the Whitehouse will never denounce violence from the right wing and his supporters, in fact he encourages it. This is what America is under Trump.

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Video of what the reporter was talking about in case you want to claim he’s lying.

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[bishnykfan]

1. who is talking about not looking at people in charge of the police? from my perspective, everyone involved is being taken to task, including mayors of the cities you are fixating on. it sounds like you think democratic mayors are not. i think a closer listen to what people are asking of society right now with regards to policing would lead you to what i'm saying. nothing's a monolith, right?

2. you think people commit crimes because there aren't consequences?

i think you're giving your posts a lot of thought and i'd like to beleive you've engaged this discussion in the right spirit. i commend that because i can't say that for everyone. but one of my biggest problems with these conversations is what looks like a desire to oversimplify in pursuit of solutions. there's no easy way to the bottom of any of this.

I've seen very little regarding the issues with cities leadership throughout these threads albeit I don't follow as closely to them as some on here. The police are the focus and I understand that with all that has happened these past few months. I'm just bringing out what in my opinion is an underlying issue in a lot of these cases. I think reform needs to start from the top down. I don't follow these threads completely so if I missed people discussing the lack of leadership in our cities then I apologize for bringing it up again. This whole line of discussion started because someone asked how Trump can run on law and order. As a non democrat, I tried to give an outsiders viewpoint. That's all.

I think people commit crimes for many reasons. But I think the fact that consequences are reduced or eliminated will contribute to more crime. I'm not oversimplifying anything because I don't have the solution. I never pretended to have the solution. If I did know the answer, I wouldn't be writing it on a basketball message board. To me there is no absolute right answer, it's going to take compromise and time and people working across the aisle which is something that will never happen IMO with the current state of things. The rhetoric has been amped up to the point where neither side will give an inch. They will watch the people suffer before giving the other side a win (both parties are guilty of this). And this is the problem which will keep us in this same cycle.

a ha. i see. i wasn't talking about in these threads. i was speaking more broadly. i have not been reading all of the recent political threads, so i can't speak to that. i understand if you are asking these members specifically and in earnest. my suggestion remains. there's lots of information about this from tons of organizations. it wouldn't be a legthy pursuit to find if desired.

i don't believe the answer to all crime is harsher penalties. of course there are psychopaths and sociopaths we need protection from. however, when we speak to the criminal ecosystem in cities we are largely talking about problems stemming from living conditions, not that people haven't found the number of years in prison that will end criminal activity. we're usually talking about drug-related crime when talking about cities and POC, so let's start there simply. if someone is addicted to drugs for one reason or another, you are not going to find a prison sentence that will stop that. if someone lacks resources and opportunities and incorrectly tries to mitigate that through participation in the drug trade... you're not going to find a number of years that prevent people from taking those risks. (grave oversimplication of vicious cycles, but an attempt at perspective.) all that's done is put people in cages in greater numbers for longer periods of time. vicious cycles at play. quicksand. people don't always think through larger societal impact when they're trying to survive. on a deeper level, we live in an individualist society that encourages "i got mine. **** you." we also live in a country founded on a violence-based social contract. some political belief systems encourage these ways of thinking more than others. it's honestly a marvel things aren't worse. i'd like to believe that's a testament to the general decency of people and desire for coexistence, but that's just me.

the criminal justice reform you agree needs to take place absolutely has to reevaluate what that looks like. that's generally what people are asking for. those are matters of policy that tell us how society does indeed value the people in these communities we all supposedly care about. [i always point to how charleston, SC has a $55m police budget and a $900k housing and urban development budget, the entirety of which could not house 3 families. but let's gather leaves without of planting or watering.]

not even going into how crime statistics are a function of who is arrested and who is policed to what extent. the need for criminal justice reform (which you agree with) indicates that this isn't handled appropriately or fairly and is in need of reevaluation. right?

I appreciate the response. I don't pretend to have all the answers. I do believe that prison should be reserved for mainly violent offenses. I'm not generally a political person. In your opinion was the First Step Act a good beginning towards prison reforming ending mass incarceration especially for non-violent and drug offenses? As far as police reform goes there seems to be a real opportunity and willingness to make changes. To me, the fact that this hasn't already happened is a failure of our legislature branch which is supposed to make the laws to protect all Americans. But there is more legislation ready to go if Congress can ever figure out a way to work together.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3955?r=1&s=1

https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/justice-act-introduced-in-united-states-senate

Getting rid of no knock warrants, making body cams mandatory or withhold funding, increasing transparency about past discipline issues for law enforcement officers, etc...there are beginnings on the table to make police more accountable. In your opinion are these not the beginnings of much needed reform? The question now is can Congress work together to make things better for the people.

Obviously other reforms are needed throughout our society to make things more equitable for all. I know that police budgets are incredibly high in most cities especially compared to social programs in those areas. All I'm saying is that IMO, getting rid of the police or hamstringing them will create other problems which we are seeing now in many places. There has to be a way to serve all the people. Take the criminals, especially the violent criminals, regardless of their race, off of the street to protect the law abiding citizen that just wants to live their life. Improving education and opportunity for all should be the goal. Will opportunity zones help in this regard? Will this help in creating opportunity for low income individuals? I don't have the answers at all. But from an outsiders perspective, it seems that there is at least a bipartisan movement to try and raise the people living in the lowest conditions of our society up. I have never followed these types of things as closely as maybe I should've but I don't recall there being this kind of push for these changes before.

And I agree completely with you. I think that the majority of our society are decent people who just want to live their life and are happy to coexist with any and all other decent people.

[Clyde_Style]

[Pointgod]

I've seen very little regarding the issues with cities leadership throughout these threads albeit I don't follow as closely to them as some on here. The police are the focus and I understand that with all that has happened these past few months. I'm just bringing out what in my opinion is an underlying issue in a lot of these cases. I think reform needs to start from the top down. I don't follow these threads completely so if I missed people discussing the lack of leadership in our cities then I apologize for bringing it up again. This whole line of discussion started because someone asked how Trump can run on law and order. As a non democrat, I tried to give an outsiders viewpoint. That's all.

I think people commit crimes for many reasons. But I think the fact that consequences are reduced or eliminated will contribute to more crime. I'm not oversimplifying anything because I don't have the solution. I never pretended to have the solution. If I did know the answer, I wouldn't be writing it on a basketball message board. To me there is no absolute right answer, it's going to take compromise and time and people working across the aisle which is something that will never happen IMO with the current state of things. The rhetoric has been amped up to the point where neither side will give an inch. They will watch the people suffer before giving the other side a win (both parties are guilty of this). And this is the problem which will keep us in this same cycle.

a ha. i see. i wasn't talking about in these threads. i was speaking more broadly. i have not been reading all of the recent political threads, so i can't speak to that. i understand if you are asking these members specifically and in earnest. my suggestion remains. there's lots of information about this from tons of organizations. it wouldn't be a legthy pursuit to find if desired.

i don't believe the answer to all crime is harsher penalties. of course there are psychopaths and sociopaths we need protection from. however, when we speak to the criminal ecosystem in cities we are largely talking about problems stemming from living conditions, not that people haven't found the number of years in prison that will end criminal activity. we're usually talking about drug-related crime when talking about cities and POC, so let's start there simply. if someone is addicted to drugs for one reason or another, you are not going to find a prison sentence that will stop that. if someone lacks resources and opportunities and incorrectly tries to mitigate that through participation in the drug trade... you're not going to find a number of years that prevent people from taking those risks. (grave oversimplication of vicious cycles, but an attempt at perspective.) all that's done is put people in cages in greater numbers for longer periods of time. vicious cycles at play. quicksand. people don't always think through larger societal impact when they're trying to survive. on a deeper level, we live in an individualist society that encourages "i got mine. **** you." we also live in a country founded on a violence-based social contract. some political belief systems encourage these ways of thinking more than others. it's honestly a marvel things aren't worse. i'd like to believe that's a testament to the general decency of people and desire for coexistence, but that's just me.

the criminal justice reform you agree needs to take place absolutely has to reevaluate what that looks like. that's generally what people are asking for. those are matters of policy that tell us how society does indeed value the people in these communities we all supposedly care about. [i always point to how charleston, SC has a $55m police budget and a $900k housing and urban development budget, the entirety of which could not house 3 families. but let's gather leaves without of planting or watering.]

not even going into how crime statistics are a function of who is arrested and who is policed to what extent. the need for criminal justice reform (which you agree with) indicates that this isn't handled appropriately or fairly and is in need of reevaluation. right?

I appreciate the response. I don't pretend to have all the answers. I do believe that prison should be reserved for mainly violent offenses. I'm not generally a political person. In your opinion was the First Step Act a good beginning towards prison reforming ending mass incarceration especially for non-violent and drug offenses? As far as police reform goes there seems to be a real opportunity and willingness to make changes. To me, the fact that this hasn't already happened is a failure of our legislature branch which is supposed to make the laws to protect all Americans. But there is more legislation ready to go if Congress can ever figure out a way to work together.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3955?r=1&s=1

https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/justice-act-introduced-in-united-states-senate

Getting rid of no knock warrants, making body cams mandatory or withhold funding, increasing transparency about past discipline issues for law enforcement officers, etc...there are beginnings on the table to make police more accountable. In your opinion are these not the beginnings of much needed reform? The question now is can Congress work together to make things better for the people.

Obviously other reforms are needed throughout our society to make things more equitable for all. I know that police budgets are incredibly high in most cities especially compared to social programs in those areas. All I'm saying is that IMO, getting rid of the police or hamstringing them will create other problems which we are seeing now in many places. There has to be a way to serve all the people. Take the criminals, especially the violent criminals, regardless of their race, off of the street to protect the law abiding citizen that just wants to live their life. Improving education and opportunity for all should be the goal. Will opportunity zones help in this regard? Will this help in creating opportunity for low income individuals? I don't have the answers at all. But from an outsiders perspective, it seems that there is at least a bipartisan movement to try and raise the people living in the lowest conditions of our society up. I have never followed these types of things as closely as maybe I should've but I don't recall there being this kind of push for these changes before.

And I agree completely with you. I think that the majority of our society are decent people who just want to live their life and are happy to coexist with any and all other decent people.

The fact there there hasn’t been any laws of police reform is a failure of the Republicans in the Senate, Mitch McConnell and Trump. Those are the facts. Democrats passed a police reform bill in the Congress.

House Democrats approved a far-reaching police overhaul Thursday evening in a vote heavy with emotion and symbolism as a divided Congress struggles to address the global outcry over the deaths of George Floyd and other Black Americans

On the eve of the vote, U.S. President Donald Trump's administration signaled he would veto the bill. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has also said it would not pass the Republican-held chamber.

Congress was at a standstill on police reform on Wednesday after Senate Democrats successfully blocked a Republican bill criticized as a toothless response to police brutality.
The vote was 55-45, failing to reach the 60-vote threshold needed to advance. Two Democrats, the Alabama senator Doug Jones and the West Virginia senator Joe Manchin, along with Angus King of Maine, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, voted with Republicans to open the debate.

So here’s how it works. House passed a bill through Congress and sent it to the Senate. The Senate couldn’t even get their bill up for debate. Republicans could work work Democrats in the Senate to create a law that could be up for debate. Here’s the important thing, the Republicans in the Senate could bring the law passed in the Congress up for debate and see if that could pass but they refuse to. So to say Congress is to blame is false. Also in the background Trump, the actual President, is said he would veto any legislation and instead of forcing all parties to work together or have the Senate take up the legislation he’s purposely creating division.

[Capn'O]

JUST POSTED AN ANNOUNCEMENT ON POLITICAL THREAD CONDUCT AT THE TOP OF THE BOARD. PLEASE READ:

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1990680

[Clyde_Style]

"You are a Russian mail order bride"

[Jeff Van Gully]

I've seen very little regarding the issues with cities leadership throughout these threads albeit I don't follow as closely to them as some on here. The police are the focus and I understand that with all that has happened these past few months. I'm just bringing out what in my opinion is an underlying issue in a lot of these cases. I think reform needs to start from the top down. I don't follow these threads completely so if I missed people discussing the lack of leadership in our cities then I apologize for bringing it up again. This whole line of discussion started because someone asked how Trump can run on law and order. As a non democrat, I tried to give an outsiders viewpoint. That's all.

I think people commit crimes for many reasons. But I think the fact that consequences are reduced or eliminated will contribute to more crime. I'm not oversimplifying anything because I don't have the solution. I never pretended to have the solution. If I did know the answer, I wouldn't be writing it on a basketball message board. To me there is no absolute right answer, it's going to take compromise and time and people working across the aisle which is something that will never happen IMO with the current state of things. The rhetoric has been amped up to the point where neither side will give an inch. They will watch the people suffer before giving the other side a win (both parties are guilty of this). And this is the problem which will keep us in this same cycle.

a ha. i see. i wasn't talking about in these threads. i was speaking more broadly. i have not been reading all of the recent political threads, so i can't speak to that. i understand if you are asking these members specifically and in earnest. my suggestion remains. there's lots of information about this from tons of organizations. it wouldn't be a legthy pursuit to find if desired.

i don't believe the answer to all crime is harsher penalties. of course there are psychopaths and sociopaths we need protection from. however, when we speak to the criminal ecosystem in cities we are largely talking about problems stemming from living conditions, not that people haven't found the number of years in prison that will end criminal activity. we're usually talking about drug-related crime when talking about cities and POC, so let's start there simply. if someone is addicted to drugs for one reason or another, you are not going to find a prison sentence that will stop that. if someone lacks resources and opportunities and incorrectly tries to mitigate that through participation in the drug trade... you're not going to find a number of years that prevent people from taking those risks. (grave oversimplication of vicious cycles, but an attempt at perspective.) all that's done is put people in cages in greater numbers for longer periods of time. vicious cycles at play. quicksand. people don't always think through larger societal impact when they're trying to survive. on a deeper level, we live in an individualist society that encourages "i got mine. **** you." we also live in a country founded on a violence-based social contract. some political belief systems encourage these ways of thinking more than others. it's honestly a marvel things aren't worse. i'd like to believe that's a testament to the general decency of people and desire for coexistence, but that's just me.

the criminal justice reform you agree needs to take place absolutely has to reevaluate what that looks like. that's generally what people are asking for. those are matters of policy that tell us how society does indeed value the people in these communities we all supposedly care about. [i always point to how charleston, SC has a $55m police budget and a $900k housing and urban development budget, the entirety of which could not house 3 families. but let's gather leaves without of planting or watering.]

not even going into how crime statistics are a function of who is arrested and who is policed to what extent. the need for criminal justice reform (which you agree with) indicates that this isn't handled appropriately or fairly and is in need of reevaluation. right?

I appreciate the response. I don't pretend to have all the answers. I do believe that prison should be reserved for mainly violent offenses. I'm not generally a political person. In your opinion was the First Step Act a good beginning towards prison reforming ending mass incarceration especially for non-violent and drug offenses? As far as police reform goes there seems to be a real opportunity and willingness to make changes. To me, the fact that this hasn't already happened is a failure of our legislature branch which is supposed to make the laws to protect all Americans. But there is more legislation ready to go if Congress can ever figure out a way to work together.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3955?r=1&s=1

https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/justice-act-introduced-in-united-states-senate

Getting rid of no knock warrants, making body cams mandatory or withhold funding, increasing transparency about past discipline issues for law enforcement officers, etc...there are beginnings on the table to make police more accountable. In your opinion are these not the beginnings of much needed reform? The question now is can Congress work together to make things better for the people.

Obviously other reforms are needed throughout our society to make things more equitable for all. I know that police budgets are incredibly high in most cities especially compared to social programs in those areas. All I'm saying is that IMO, getting rid of the police or hamstringing them will create other problems which we are seeing now in many places. There has to be a way to serve all the people. Take the criminals, especially the violent criminals, regardless of their race, off of the street to protect the law abiding citizen that just wants to live their life. Improving education and opportunity for all should be the goal. Will opportunity zones help in this regard? Will this help in creating opportunity for low income individuals? I don't have the answers at all. But from an outsiders perspective, it seems that there is at least a bipartisan movement to try and raise the people living in the lowest conditions of our society up. I have never followed these types of things as closely as maybe I should've but I don't recall there being this kind of push for these changes before.

And I agree completely with you. I think that the majority of our society are decent people who just want to live their life and are happy to coexist with any and all other decent people.

thanks again for your continued respectful dialogue here. i don't expect any of us (myself included) to have the answers. but earnest discussion can lead us to the synthesis of ideas that can get us there... and maybe properly construct the foundation of what america is supposed to be about. at present, the social experiment isn't looking healthy.

i think it's a positive thing that republicans are publicly considering these things. i suppose that's progress to an extent. as a black south carolinian, your citation of tim scott hits very close to home for many reasons. i think they are still out of step in that reforming the police organizations is necessary (what that looks like in detail remains to be seen), but it's still not a good look that the JUSTICE act's language still staunchly defends bloated police budgets. so many people see that in the face of underfunding in key areas that would make policing needs very different. clearly the public is not satisfied with that.

i also find it ironic that policing is one area fiscal conservatives are not interested in being more... fiscally conservative.

in relation to the presidential election we're discussing, it's a shame that they don't all stand as tall against vitriol and harmful rhetoric that undermines these messages and attempts to come to the table. south carolina's republican senators looked like they were going to stand up to trump that way at first. lindsey made a complete about face and tim is just starting to show his teeth, like he's having some kind of epiphany.

many who are oppressed cannot appreciate any of this "progress" when they feel dehumanized in the discourse of its leaders. that's a zero sum game. i have always believed there are plenty of people from all backgrounds who would subscribe to conservative ideals if they didn't find them so closely tied to divisive "isms." it's a lost opportunity that the current administration has pushed the public away from them.

if i were a political strategist trying to help the republican party, i'd start there.

[rammagen]

For sure.

Trump made the market priority after the virus and got the fed to print more money. I think dems should run on that. Market recessions are completely natural. But pumping all your resources into it and not the people during a pandemic is not. I think Obama/Biden would have let the market fall and focused on the lower/middle class; while Trump is looking after the middle/upper class and their 401ks and maintaining their wealth.

That being said, people are sheep. They see a good market, they attach it to the president and think he's doing well. Especially after the drops we saw.

And I personally know people who are still voting for Trump even though they hate him and think he's racist because they are killing it in the market. So that worries me.

Hopefully they bring up the deficit a lot as well. I believe Trump is outspending Obama's years IIRC. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I dont think the spending comparison is too valid as Obama spent early and heavy on getting out of the recession while trump spent on the trade wars, and tax breaks.
Interesting article....
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2020/02/01/trumps-deficits-are-racing-past-obamas/#76b71d5a4819
If I was the dems I would be playing that up. Most people don't realize there is more then just the market as an indicator of how healthy a nations economy is

they are apples and oranges, but recessions haven't historically been fixed the way he did - mainly continuing the war that dumbass Bush got us involved in.

he exasperated a lot of it by not listening to a lot of people who advised him that certain ideas and programs would lead to economic problems for the people he thought he was helping (obamacare and lower/middle class families).


trump just isn't helping anything that was started by clinton, made worse by bush, new and innovated ways to hurt the economy by obama.

that's why i would want someone like cuban or yang in there to try to right the ship

do you realize you are blaming CLinton when was the last time we had close to a blanced budget? Under Clinton when he left the deficit was under Clinton https://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/
under the 2nd bush he spent on unneeded war for weapons of mass destruction and tax break for the rich
Under Obama he spent to get us out of a recession, other ways to do it yes but if that was the case the recovery would have taken longer.
Where it ballooned is under trump. Obama care whether you liek t or not was a compromise and it is needed to get health care to people who dont have it or cant afford it.
Trump has hurt the lower/middle class worse then the last administration hands down without providing any type of programs. In fact quite the opposite he has taken away programs.
Personally I believe in a flat tax and the only tax breaks you get are for donations

[Clyde_Style]

Read on Twitter

[HarthorneWingo]

Are there any Trump supporters here other than BallSac?

[Stannis]

I'll say it again, if I'm a Republican, and I put myself Donald's shoes. This is what he is doing right now:

1) He's telling himself and everyone that "Democratic run" cities are burning to the ground because of their poor democratic leaders.
2) He is acknowledging that their businesses and people are suffering
3) He still decides to do nothing but blame them for it and leave them hanging. There is no working relationship between these cities and Trump.

I gotta say, if he thinks there are people who need help and he doesn't want to do anything about it because they have a democratic leader, he's a real POS. That's not Presidential material.

Trump IS in power. He's in the White House. All the stuff he's saying he will do when re-elected is stuff he can do now. I see little to no progress or results. So I find it hard to believe.

I swear, it's like Biden is running as the incumbent and Trump is running to beat him. Really makes no sense to me.

If I had to venture a guess... Trump's plan to "fix" this is some sort of Martial Law and labeling BLM a terrorist group. My guess is he doesn't want to do that now because that will kill his re-election. So he's hoping to win then do it. Hopefully people understand that, and vote him out November. At the very least, hopefully dems win the senate where they can impeach him if he tries such a thing.

With this post, your now daily doomsaying and your election predictions it feels less like you're calling it like you see it and more like you're campaigning for Trump now. The spirit of your posts have turned into pure gloom about the inevitability of Trump's re-election.

You are not providing analysis if you are tailoring your interpretation of data to fit your paranoid biases. Enough with the fear mongering.

Yes, I'm campaigning for Trump.

Hey guys, "let's elect Trump so we can see martial law"

/s

[Stannis]

Are there any Trump supporters here other than BallSac?

There's apparently 9 of them according to our RealGM polls.

I have some guesses, but don't want to turn this thread into "Who are the Trump supporters"

[HarthorneWingo]

Are there any Trump supporters here other than BallSac?

There's apparently 9 of them according to our RealGM polls.

I have some guesses, but don't want to turn this thread into "Who are the Trump supporters"

I just seems like the only person we're debating with here is BallSac.

[HarthorneWingo]

Things are tightening up in this race and Trump has more enthusiasm from his base. Biden, not so much. Any enthusiasm has to do with hating Trump, not loving Biden.

Biden has to do two things to change that, (1) support M4A; and (2) Legalization of marijuana as part of a global criminal justice reform package. This talk about "fighting for the soul of our nation" isn't going to cut it.

[HarthorneWingo]

Read on Twitter

Mueller messed up.