2020 Presidential Election Thread: The Homestretch

[Pointgod]

Why have so many voted against their economic interests for so long? Conservatives have been winning the messaging battle with them for a while. Let's face it, it's much easier to appear to that demographic with demagoguery.

I think there's a rational side to the argument (true or not) that says if there is a path for the "have nots" to become part of the "haves" by having a political party in power that is conducive to lower taxes and higher wealth, then there is a reason for the "have nots" to support said party. It's when you're in an environment such as this where there is no path visible and the gap is only widening that, the only explanation is that there must be a deep emotional reasoning that can't be swayed.

There's the evangelical/anti-abortions/law and order conservatives and Fox news and conservative radio played upon people's xenophobic fears after 911 the same way that Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Guiliani played upon peoples' fears of Black people during the crack epidemic of the 80s.

I can understand that people in middle/lower income brackets who are living paycheck to paycheck are swayed by tax cuts that save them a couple thousand a year but they're missing the part where the top 1% and large corporation are taking us to the cleaners which means that these middle and lower income voters are getting screwed financially in others ways.

It's why Trump said he loves the uneducated voter and, goes what? They cheered right along with him. Go figure.

I think you nailed the issue on the head. There are just a lot of one issue voters on the right and they VOTE no matter what come hell or high water. So it seems like there’s always a voting block for Republicans but in reality it’s a coalition of one issue voters.

The thing about saving money on income taxes has never made sense to me because sure you might save a couple hundred of bucks a year but you absolutely get screwed on services when rural hospitals close, education budgets get slashed and other services social services are discontinued all to the benefit of the 1%.

[Pointgod]

Read on Twitter

[BallSacBounce]

Out of context you'd be correct, in context though...

2016 hillary won the majority of votes.

2018 the seats up for grabs favored the republicans.

Either way, mcconnell established the new set of rules to play by. If the courts get packed, they get packed, just realize that mcconnell forced this not the dems and if it has consequences, we'll see in 2 years, not this election. This year regardless of which side wins is more of a referendum on how popular trump is and how much of his **** that the public is willing to take.

Harry Reid ended the filibuster on federal judges McConnell extended that to the SC.

This judicial argunent is a whole different animal but go ahead and push that justification publicly. Looking forward to it.

Rhetoric in 2016 was no different than 2020 is. Orange Man is so, so bad. Same, same. I don't see how it pushes the.needle this time when it wasn't enough the last time.

I think the soft fizzle of the ending of the Mueller investigation and the Impeachment proceedings will have a positive effect for Trump. Maybe not, we'll see.

By definition incumbents have been vetted. The public listened to the counter arguments and rejected them. They are difficult to replace.

Since the end of World War II there have been 11 incumbent presidential elections. Only 3 were lost.

Ford lost to Carter. Perfectly understandable he was not elected in the first place and the stench of Watergate hung over Republicans at the time.

Carter loses to Reagan. Reagan was a charismatic candidate and Carter was, well, "malaise."

George HW Bush loses to Clinton. Again a much different very charismatic candidate wins over a dud.

Biden is no Clinton or Reagan. He's a dud himself. So you are relegated to a toxic smear campaign against Trump. It could work of course. People could very well be tired of the whole shebang no matter who is at fault. It's possible.

But this guy has been smeared and denigrated his entire previous campaign and his entire term and nothing seems to stick. People may just be ignoring the sounding of the alarms by now. It's entirely possible its been done too many times and that message is being tuned out as background noise.

So we might just be back again ironically enough to this election being decided mainly on the issues not the smears by either side. The noise level has been deafening but are many people just plain deaf now because of it?

Facts without context are cheats. Reid was forced to kill the filibuster cuz the republicans were using it to stymie Obamas picks at every turn. So while the bull they pulled with garland was better known, it was only the tip of the iceberg of the **** they were pulling with Obama's lower court appointments. Theres a reason there were so many openings for Trump to fill. Also, you know what senators said when asked about allowing Hillary to pick if she won? We can do with 8. So I guess they forgot to be worried about tradition then. Biden not committing to one side or another is a warning, not an indication of anything... yet.

Trumps actions speak for themselves. It's alot easier to bull the populace when you're a relative unknown with no real record to run on facing probably the most unpopular democrat that was forced down everybody's throat. And while yes biden isn't like the others who have unseated incumbents, trump is a whole lot worse than the incumbents who have been unseated. Dems dont have to smear trump, he plays himself with every action, every word that he blusters not just on tv, but on twitter for all to see.

Harry Reid was never forced to do anything he was a hyper partisan **** who screwed with Bush's appointments and cried wolf when Obama's appointments were on pace with Bush's. Tough **** Harry.

https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=27dac90e-11a3-48d1-b970-19c2894530a5

In an attempt to create the perception of Republican resistance, Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev), has taken the extraordinary step of scheduling contentious cloture votes for 17 nominees who were otherwise on the normal path to routine confirmation, claiming “delay for delay’s sake.”

Of course, these desperate claims are entirely false: the Senate has already confirmed more of President Obama’s nominees (129) than it did during President George W. Bush’s entire second term (120), and has done so at an almost identical pace (average of 218 and 211 days, respectively, from nomination to confirmation). Indeed, not long ago Reid acknowledged that the Senate has “done a good job on nominations,” and a Judiciary Committee Democrat recently noted that we have been “speeding up the confirmation of judges.”

Claims of Republican obstruction are not only demonstrably false, they are highly hypocritical. The very Democrats now seeking to manufacture confirmation controversy personally devised and carried out a systematic effort to block President Bush’s judicial nominees through an unprecedented use of the Senate filibuster.

It is a matter of historical record that beginning in 2001, Senate Democrats dramatically changed the confirmation process. Throughout the Bush administration, Democrats actively sought to block numerous judicial nominees, forcing more than 30 cloture votes as Republicans tried to end persistent Democratic filibuster efforts.  
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), voted against cloture a record-setting 27 times. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), cast 26 votes to filibuster Bush nominees and, in 2003, defiantly declared: “Yes, we are blocking judges by filibuster. That is part of the hallowed process around here.”  

Even Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who now claims to have been “respectful of President Bush’s appointments,” repeatedly joined with Democratic colleagues in attempting to filibuster judicial confirmations, including seven separate votes against cloture for the nomination of Miguel Estrada—one of the nation’s leading appellate lawyers—to the D.C. Circuit.  

Not to be outdone, Reid took virtually every opportunity to block Bush nominees, voting against cloture on 26 separate occasions. In his view there was no amount of time—“not a number in the universe”—that would be adequate for debate on the filibustered nominees.

[BallSacBounce]

The left calls ALL people in the right nazis and white supremacists. Don't care what vox has to say.

Okay so ignore all evidence and a well researched article because it blows up your argument.

Spoiler:

BallSac, are you going to the rally?

The neo Nazis/white supremacists, etc., they're on YOUR team not our. AND, your leader won't condemn them in the spirit in which they so richly deserve to be condemned. Not this mamby pamby weak tea condemnations.

So, while I understand that many of you do not subscribe to the whole white terrorists manifesto, they're your problem until you deal with them proper like. In the meantime, it would probably help your credibility with the group if you condemned all forms from of white terrorists, e.g. Proud Boys, Boogaloo Movement, etc.

I've already condemned white supremacists Wingo. Multiple times. This is a fetish for leftists. A constant never ending demand for yet another condemnation. This isn't about condemnation for you and the other leftists. It's about defamation. You just keep repeating the same BS charge over and over again to smear your opponents.

Meanwhile, neither you nor anyone else here has condemned the leftist riots and violence. You have no moral superiority because of that. You just think you do. As a result it's easy to see that you do not possess any fair minded desire for a coming to terms and moving forward. You just want to smear. No problem. But....

More and more people are seeing through this two-faced hypocrisy and are rejecting it. Trump will get at least 5 points more Hispanic votes and will move into double digits with Black people.

So, I don't need your or anyone else's approval. It's worthless demagoguery that people are rejecting. It just gets a firestorm of attention in the media/social media.

[robillionaire]

not only will I not condemn black lives matter and anti fascist action I fully support and condone and encourage it, and I also don't care about any perceived moral high ground either because that's a myth and failed strategy. But at least I'm honest when I say it unlike you and trump, who support white supremacist terror but want to hide behind the both sides rhetoric in order to dog whistle to them your support like we all can't see through that bs

[BallSacBounce]

That's not my criterion. What I mean is: Whatever groups you (everybody) may despise for whatever reasons, isn't Biden the best option at the moment considering that the country is literally in flames three years into the current leader's turn? Biden may not be everybody's or not even anybody's favorite choice, but he clearly seems like the better option, one to start a deerly needed transition with. A compromise, a new beginning, a moment of four years to take a breath and go into a new process with two healthier parties. Not because of Biden's skill, but because of the terrible status quo, sadly. I think that's prudent and I also think you can't deny that it's never been worse or more chaotic and depressing. Trump was rock-bottom, even if you prefer conservative/right politics. He's erratic.

What's more, I don't think you always want to go on fighting for that flawed idea all the time. It must be exhausting (and I think it's stubborn, with all due respect).

Edit: And let me add: Looking at it this way, Biden is even preferable to Sanders for the very same reasons even though I might have wanted him to succeed earlier. I'm not sure. He'd certainly have been too polarizing too. The images all over the country have become too loaded, too graphic, the hatred and spite too grave. Biden sure is no hardliner, no bad compromise for anyone. He's nothing anybody will regret and chances are you're not rich enough for him to come for your tax money. This country needs a break, regardless of who you want to blame. The people need a break now, it can't just continue. Biden would be that and he likely couldn't even run a second time at his age.

I'm not rewarding the left for raising hell for four years by voting Biden. That is the opposite of the right response. Non stop BS investigations/Impeachment etc.and you think that it's Trump's fault things are so screwed up? Nah man. Not a buyer.

I do understand your line of thinking but we differ on the cause. The left has never accepted Madame Secretarys loss to the "deplorable" Donald Trump and they've been throwing a temper tantrum ever since. I think they're ready for a generation type election time out.

And I think what's necessary to cure this insanity is more Donald Trump. Let people have their nervous breakdown over the Bad Orange Man and when they're ready to act like adults again we'll listen.

Two things stand out to me:

Biden is not the left really. He should really be a good compromise actually. You seem concerned about these elections, but I don't think you really know all about yourself. Neither do I: I'm left and right and I don't mean my arms and legs. My opinion isn't depending on the weather though, but depending on detail. I'm often so conservative even colleagues or family call me out for it. The left is not an enemy, but the conservative party also isn't one. The wings are obviously dangerous drunkee-type maniacs, but dude, make sure you're not trippin. They shouldn't matter when you vote.

I'm not trying to sell you anything, but the second thing that stands out to me: You don't visualize how things could be better. Try to to so and try not to see me as a salesman. Trump isn't soothing. And that sure isn't helping anybody. His act doesn't and didn't improve anything. I'm really not interested one bit in how you - who I don't know one bit - will vote. I do however think that cooler heads prevail and I would assume you'd like that too. Trump is hot air and you know it. Don't go low in order to be provocative. I'm not as left as even I'd like to think. But this is not a black and white matter for us... only for him. I'm sure you know what I mean. I'm not trying to win an argument, I just think you're suppresing something. Hopefully you don't misunderstand any of that.

Biden is completely unacceptable. You don't understand the core issues if you think he is.

This country has been sold out by our politicians to the benefit of China. Global corporate interests have lobbied our pols successfully for trade deals that have decimated our manufacturing base.

Whatever jobs they couldn't export they either brought in talent through work visas to save money or allowed unfettered illegal immigration for more low skilled labor. They were hollowing out America for their own corporate benefit.

If you don't get that part you don't get anything about why we voted for Trump.

Biden's son Hunter received 1 Billion from a Chinese bank for his hedge fund two weeks after Joe visited China, later increased to 1.5 Billion. All while the Obama administration looked the other way in Chinese IP theft and the decimation of American manufacturing. Obama famously said about Trump's promise to bring back jobs Obama said weren't coming back "What magic wand does he have?"

It's cynical no caring **** like that got Trump elected and will get him re-elected.

[Clyde_Style]

I think there's a rational side to the argument (true or not) that says if there is a path for the "have nots" to become part of the "haves" by having a political party in power that is conducive to lower taxes and higher wealth, then there is a reason for the "have nots" to support said party. It's when you're in an environment such as this where there is no path visible and the gap is only widening that, the only explanation is that there must be a deep emotional reasoning that can't be swayed.

There's the evangelical/anti-abortions/law and order conservatives and Fox news and conservative radio played upon people's xenophobic fears after 911 the same way that Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Guiliani played upon peoples' fears of Black people during the crack epidemic of the 80s.

I can understand that people in middle/lower income brackets who are living paycheck to paycheck are swayed by tax cuts that save them a couple thousand a year but they're missing the part where the top 1% and large corporation are taking us to the cleaners which means that these middle and lower income voters are getting screwed financially in others ways.

It's why Trump said he loves the uneducated voter and, goes what? They cheered right along with him. Go figure.

As someone who identified as neither Republican or Democrat I can say to me they are, in today’s America, 2 sides of the authoritarian coin. Republicans, legitimately or not, are branded as the party of less government. Which for many is a better promise than anything else Dems are selling. The question, as it’s posed, paints a picture in my head of the queen asking “but I let them have cake, why are they upset”. What the Democrats are describing is not historically a way to upward movement on the economic ladder. It was always more difficult to break the bonds of the class you were born into in more authoritative governments - whether that be ultra right or ultra left. Although, I will again say both are just different (and terrible) ways to implement authoritarianism. So yes, I think there is some “but they’ll take my guns and brown people bad” voters. I also think there are a lot more who say it’s not about what either side is promising me, but that i chose freedom over security and the ability to use my own abilities to move up the economic ladder.

That said, I haven’t voted for a president that wasn’t a 3rd party or write in since the first W. election (that guy sounded awesome in the debates....then dick f’n Chaney happened)

All those freedoms will disappear with the consolidation of GOP power. The other side of the coin is the Democrats will not eviscerate every right you have. Even if you are no fan of the Democrats, when faced with an actual fascist movement the lesser of two evils argument becomes irrelevant. Voting for the Democrats this election is about holding on to freedom, because even if they are not your answer, the GOP is your nightmare. It is a clear choice even for a devout independent.

[BallSacBounce]

not only will I not condemn black lives matter and anti fascist action I fully support and condone and encourage it, and I also don't care about any perceived moral high ground either because that's a myth and failed strategy. But at least I'm honest when I say it unlike you and trump, who support white supremacist terror but want to hide behind the both sides rhetoric in order to dog whistle to them your support like we all can't see through that bs

There ya go. That wasn't so hard was it? Simple honesty. I knew it was so anyway but nobody wanted to man up and admit it.

But I personally condemn all political violence. I don't like it, it absolutely sickens me and IMO it is also counter-productive.

[robillionaire]

not only will I not condemn black lives matter and anti fascist action I fully support and condone and encourage it, and I also don't care about any perceived moral high ground either because that's a myth and failed strategy. But at least I'm honest when I say it unlike you and trump, who support white supremacist terror but want to hide behind the both sides rhetoric in order to dog whistle to them your support like we all can't see through that bs

There ya go. That wasn't so hard was it? Simple honesty. I knew it was so anyway but nobody wanted to man up and admit it.

But I personally condemn all political violence. I don't like it, it absolutely sickens me and IMO it is also counter-productive.

you can say that however I think you're lying which is why you all celebrate and encourage killing protesters

[BallSacBounce]

not only will I not condemn black lives matter and anti fascist action I fully support and condone and encourage it, and I also don't care about any perceived moral high ground either because that's a myth and failed strategy. But at least I'm honest when I say it unlike you and trump, who support white supremacist terror but want to hide behind the both sides rhetoric in order to dog whistle to them your support like we all can't see through that bs

There ya go. That wasn't so hard was it? Simple honesty. I knew it was so anyway but nobody wanted to man up and admit it.

But I personally condemn all political violence. I don't like it, it absolutely sickens me and IMO it is also counter-productive.

you can say that however I think you're lying which is why you all celebrate and encourage killing protesters

Nope, don't do that. If it's self defense then good job of course other than that **** no.

The Patriot bear spray guy that got himself shot in Denver. Not sure yet what to think about that. Was it self defense by the shooter that was an antifa supporter? Could very well be I need more details but that guy was waving that bear spray aroun when it looked like any imminent threat was not present.

I'm a fan of self-defense not violence.

[robillionaire]

There ya go. That wasn't so hard was it? Simple honesty. I knew it was so anyway but nobody wanted to man up and admit it.

But I personally condemn all political violence. I don't like it, it absolutely sickens me and IMO it is also counter-productive.

you can say that however I think you're lying which is why you all celebrate and encourage killing protesters

Nope, don't do that. If it's self defense then good job of course other than that **** no.

The Patriot bear spray guy that got himself shot in Denver. Not sure yet what to think about that. Was it self defense by the shooter that was an antifa supporter? Could very well be I need more details but that guy was waving that bear spray aroun when it looked like any imminent threat was not present.

I'm a fan of self-defense not violence.

the shooter wasn't antifa, it was a pinkerton security guard contracted by 9news to protect their crew, propagandists like tim pool andy ngo and ian miles cheong said it was antifa before facts were out because that's what they do and then it was debunked even by the cops but they already misled so many people trying to say it was antifa that people believe it, which is ultimately the goal

now as far as whether or not the shooter was justified, depends on at what point are you within your rights to shoot someone who is attacking you with a weapon, but I also think it matters if you are the one who instigates and escalates a confrontation, I'm all for self defense too but it seems like the definition of self defense is now if it's someone on our side who killed someone it's automatically self defense because our enemies are terrorists

Read on Twitter

?s=20

https://abcnews.go.com/US/person-injured-suspects-custody-shooting-denver-protests-police/story?id=73543383

[BallSacBounce]

you can say that however I think you're lying which is why you all celebrate and encourage killing protesters

Nope, don't do that. If it's self defense then good job of course other than that **** no.

The Patriot bear spray guy that got himself shot in Denver. Not sure yet what to think about that. Was it self defense by the shooter that was an antifa supporter? Could very well be I need more details but that guy was waving that bear spray aroun when it looked like any imminent threat was not present.

I'm a fan of self-defense not violence.

the shooter wasn't antifa, it was a pinkerton security guard contracted by 9news to protect their crew, propagandists like tim pool andy ngo and ian miles cheong said it was antifa before facts were out because that's what they do and then it was debunked even by the cops but they already misled so many people trying to say it was antifa that people believe it, which is ultimately the goal

now as far as whether or not the shooter was justified, depends on at what point are you within your rights to shoot someone who is attacking you with a weapon, but I also think it matters if you are the one who instigates and escalates a confrontation, I'm all for self defense too but it seems like the definition of self defense is now if it's someone on our side who killed someone it's automatically self defense because our enemies are terrorists

Read on Twitter

?s=20

https://abcnews.go.com/US/person-injured-suspects-custody-shooting-denver-protests-police/story?id=73543383

Well I'm not saying he was Antifa but the man does have a social media history and apparently is not on the Colorado registry for security guards. Not getting into the weeds here at the moment I need more information.

The point I'm making is that this guy from what I can see is an Antifa supporter and I am not knee jerking my opinion on self defense around because he's not on the right. Regardless, if he was not an Antifa supporter my point still stands. When you endanger other people that person has the right to self defense I'm consistent on that.

[BallSacBounce]

Edit: double post

[BallSacBounce]

Exclusive – Watch: Miami Anti-Socialist Caravan Makes History, Attracting 30,000 Vehicles

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/12/exclusive-miami-anti-socialist-caravan-makes-history-attracting-30000-vehicles/

Police in Miami, Florida, estimated on Saturday that 30,000 vehicles joined a caravan expressing rejection of communism, socialism, and leftist totalitarian ideologies – an event of historic size and diversity, organizer Orlando Gutiérrez-Boronat told Breitbart News.

Gutiérrez-Boronat – the co-founder of the Cuban Democratic Directorate, a human rights non-profit – joined a coalition of Cuban, Venezuelan, Nicaraguan, Chilean, Uruguayan, and other groups to create a “patriotic committee” responsible for the event. The caravan doubled as both a public display of rejection to left-wing totalitarianism and a “drive-in” seminar on the history of communism – participants tuned into Miami’s 670 AM La Poderosa to listen to experts, including this Breitbart News journalist, discuss the destructive history and legacy of communism around the world.

[Pointgod]

There's the evangelical/anti-abortions/law and order conservatives and Fox news and conservative radio played upon people's xenophobic fears after 911 the same way that Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Guiliani played upon peoples' fears of Black people during the crack epidemic of the 80s.

I can understand that people in middle/lower income brackets who are living paycheck to paycheck are swayed by tax cuts that save them a couple thousand a year but they're missing the part where the top 1% and large corporation are taking us to the cleaners which means that these middle and lower income voters are getting screwed financially in others ways.

It's why Trump said he loves the uneducated voter and, goes what? They cheered right along with him. Go figure.

As someone who identified as neither Republican or Democrat I can say to me they are, in today’s America, 2 sides of the authoritarian coin. Republicans, legitimately or not, are branded as the party of less government. Which for many is a better promise than anything else Dems are selling. The question, as it’s posed, paints a picture in my head of the queen asking “but I let them have cake, why are they upset”. What the Democrats are describing is not historically a way to upward movement on the economic ladder. It was always more difficult to break the bonds of the class you were born into in more authoritative governments - whether that be ultra right or ultra left. Although, I will again say both are just different (and terrible) ways to implement authoritarianism. So yes, I think there is some “but they’ll take my guns and brown people bad” voters. I also think there are a lot more who say it’s not about what either side is promising me, but that i chose freedom over security and the ability to use my own abilities to move up the economic ladder.

That said, I haven’t voted for a president that wasn’t a 3rd party or write in since the first W. election (that guy sounded awesome in the debates....then dick f’n Chaney happened)

All those freedoms will disappear with the consolidation of GOP power. The other side of the coin is the Democrats will not eviscerate every right you have. Even if you are no fan of the Democrats, when faced with an actual fascist movement the lesser of two evils argument becomes irrelevant. Voting for the Democrats this election is about holding on to freedom, because even if they are not your answer, the GOP is your nightmare. It is a clear choice even for a devout independent.

Trump isn’t particularly clever with How he plans on dismantling Democracy. I urge everyone to look up Victor Orban in Hungary. There is a typical authoritarian playbook followed by Putin, China, Erdogan in Turkey etc.This is the last stop for Democracy because Trump and all the mini Trumps at the State level will **** all over the constitution.

[Pointgod]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

[GONYK]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Read on Twitter

?s=19

The numbers are flushing a lot of pro-Trump/ant-Biden narratives going down the drain

[HarthorneWingo]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Read on Twitter

?s=19

The numbers are flushing a lot of pro-Trump/ant-Biden narratives going down the drain

What are the "enthusiasm" numbers?

[GONYK]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Read on Twitter

?s=19

The numbers are flushing a lot of pro-Trump/ant-Biden narratives going down the drain

What are the "enthusiasm" numbers?

Other than meaningless?

[HarthorneWingo]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Read on Twitter

?s=19

The numbers are flushing a lot of pro-Trump/ant-Biden narratives going down the drain

What are the "enthusiasm" numbers?

Other than meaningless?

Why are you so sensitive about those? Hmm, let me guess?

But you can keep believing they're meaningless if you want, if that makes you sleep better.