2020 Presidential Election Thread presents: The Aftermath

[Kampuchea]

Looks like they found something?

Read on Twitter

You mean more BS? Those sauces are the absolute worst.

I get concerned when they have actual numbers. Hope the source is garbage

[Oscirus]

Looks like they found something?

Read on Twitter

You mean more BS? Those sauces are the absolute worst.

I get concerned when they have actual numbers. Hope the source is garbage

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/11/technology/no-dominion-voting-machines-did-not-cause-widespread-voting-problems.html

[omerome]

Looks like they found something?

Read on Twitter

You mean more BS? Those sauces are the absolute worst.

I get concerned when they have actual numbers. Hope the source is garbage

No seriously, those sources are garbage. OANN and ChanelRion are one and the same. As in ChanelRion works for OANN and that organization is even worse than Fox News. They might as well rebrand themselves as TrumpTV. They are on the level of Brietbart or Project Veritas which is sublevel.

If those numbers were real, we will start to see actual sources like NPR, Reuters, or the AP corroborate quickly - and I haven't seen anything from them.

[Oscirus]

If I didnt think they should know better, Id almost feel bad for trump voters

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-fundraising-insigh/donations-under-8k-to-trump-election-defense-instead-go-to-president-rnc-idUSKBN27R309

[HarthorneWingo]

I have not or can not confirm the things the tweeter is suggesting but it is quite interesting if true....

Read on Twitter

I'm from Kentucky, none of this is surprising, there are a lot of blue dog democrats in kentucky who didn't switch parties after the civil rights movement and now vote for republicans, and also pretty much nobody from kentucky liked amy mcgrath

Which really makes you think, if the Democrats want more races, they really need to stop putting in candidates just to gain some Independent/Republican support. Many of these candidates are simply unlikable and appeal to hardly anyone. I am not from Kentucky, but she didn't seem very charismatic at all. She sounded like another Manchin who is just another boring do-nothing person who claims we can still reach "across the aisle" to the Republicans. Which we all know is just a delusion.

Which even begs the question, why are Progressives becoming popular nowadays? I can give a simple answer. They are proposing real change. Not the same-ole, same-ole.

If you ask plenty of people in your social circle, I am sure many would tell you that they don't care about politics because both parties only cater to them during the election and then they're forgotten afterward. Well, many progressive plans will directly affect people in ways they can't ignore. Need healthcare? Well, M4A will keep you from going bankrupt from an unexpected medical bill or having to ration your medication. Worried about the environment? Yup, Green New Deal is a proposal. Hate that you are sentenced to almost a lifetime of student loan debt? They have proposals for that too.

Are all these proposals flawless? No way. But it's a start from the nothing the moderate/blue democrats have come up with over the years. At least progressive have actual ideas instead of just trying to say, "we're not Republicans so give us a chance".

If the Democrats ever want to have meaningful gains, they better start adopting more of these progressive ideals or at least try to stop thinking what worked ten years ago will work again, or they will be catching more Ls. Because at some point, the Republicans will elect a ReTRUMPlican who isn't a bumbling idiot, and then we're all in trouble.

And lastly, "reaching across the aisle" goes both ways. Why can't the Republicans ever be the initiator once? Why must it always fall on the Democrats to be the one who tries to act bi-partisan? To me, unless the Republicans show in good faith that they are willing to work together, they are the antagonists until proven otherwise.

McGrath described herself as a “Trump Democrat.” And the DNC supported her over Booker!!! What appalling stupidity. Schumer is an idiot.

[robillionaire]

I have not or can not confirm the things the tweeter is suggesting but it is quite interesting if true....

Read on Twitter

I'm from Kentucky, none of this is surprising, there are a lot of blue dog democrats in kentucky who didn't switch parties after the civil rights movement and now vote for republicans, and also pretty much nobody from kentucky liked amy mcgrath

yea, no idea what schumer was thinking backing her. But how did she beat booker, if anything he seemed fairly popular and gaining momentum at the time of that vote

40 million dollar war chest and outspent 10-1 goes a long way and even then it was close 247k to 231k votes. but I understand people thought she could actually win and he couldn't although she got steamrolled. reality is either of them would have lost because Trump's name was on the ballot and people were going to turn out to support Trump and by extension Mitch. McGrath was running as a pro-Trump democrat. Glad she's gone. Hope Booker runs again in the future after Mitch croaks. Dems wasted an absolute fortune on her campaign when they could have put money in closer races they actually had a chance in

[stuporman]

I have not or can not confirm the things the tweeter is suggesting but it is quite interesting if true....

Read on Twitter

I'm from Kentucky, none of this is surprising, there are a lot of blue dog democrats in kentucky who didn't switch parties after the civil rights movement and now vote for republicans, and also pretty much nobody from kentucky liked amy mcgrath

Thank you for the insight into the KY electorate, I just came across that and wasn't really sure what dynamics are at play. I know KY use to be more democrat during the strong union days but as their power waned it doesn't surprise me the conservative nature of rural America took over their voting habits.

Amy ran as a pro-Trump democrat and that may have turned off any dems considering her, too. She barely got by the primary challenge from the progressive Booker. Does KY allow cross party voting in primaries? I wonder how things like that if allowed effect races in places that have an already decided race in the other party.

[omerome]

McGrath described herself as a “Trump Democrat.” And the DNC supported her over Booker!!! What appalling stupidity. Schumer is an idiot.

And that was the beginning of the end of her campaign. Like why would this sound like a good idea?

So she's a watered-down version of an idiot? Well, guess what? She's still an idiot.

[stuporman]

They call fake republicans RINOs and Manchin in the same way is a DINO.

[Oscirus]

I'm from Kentucky, none of this is surprising, there are a lot of blue dog democrats in kentucky who didn't switch parties after the civil rights movement and now vote for republicans, and also pretty much nobody from kentucky liked amy mcgrath

yea, no idea what schumer was thinking backing her. But how did she beat booker, if anything he seemed fairly popular and gaining momentum at the time of that vote

40 million dollar war chest and outspent 10-1 goes a long way and even then it was close 247k to 231k votes. but I understand people thought she could actually win and he couldn't although she got steamrolled. reality is either of them would have lost because Trump's name was on the ballot and people were going to turn out to support Trump and by extension Mitch. McGrath was running as a pro-Trump democrat. Glad she's gone. Hope Booker runs again in the future after Mitch croaks. Dems wasted an absolute fortune on her campaign when they could have put money in closer races they actually had a chance in

Thats just a dumb line of thinking, if a voter wants a trump supporting politician why the **** would they vote for the democrat over his top lieutenant. I agree they both would have lost but at least booker gave them a reason not to vote for Mitch. These idiots are so busy trying to find another manchin that they fail to realize the original manchin sucks and isnt really worth it.

[HarthorneWingo]

McGrath described herself as a “Trump Democrat.” And the DNC supported her over Booker!!! What appalling stupidity. Schumer is an idiot.

And that was the beginning of the end of her campaign. Like why would this sound like a good idea?

So she's a watered-down version of an idiot? Well, guess what? She's still an idiot.

If you’re going to go down, at least go down fighting for something.

[Appleshampoo]

yea, no idea what schumer was thinking backing her. But how did she beat booker, if anything he seemed fairly popular and gaining momentum at the time of that vote

40 million dollar war chest and outspent 10-1 goes a long way and even then it was close 247k to 231k votes. but I understand people thought she could actually win and he couldn't although she got steamrolled. reality is either of them would have lost because Trump's name was on the ballot and people were going to turn out to support Trump and by extension Mitch. McGrath was running as a pro-Trump democrat. Glad she's gone. Hope Booker runs again in the future after Mitch croaks. Dems wasted an absolute fortune on her campaign when they could have put money in closer races they actually had a chance in

Thats just a dumb line of thinking, if a voter wants a trump supporting politician why the **** would they vote for the democrat over his top lieutenant. I agree they both would have lost but at least booker gave them a reason not to vote for Mitch. These idiots are so busy trying to find another manchin that they fail to realize the original manchin sucks and isnt really worth it.

The primary challenger Charles Booker took off on social media. They raised a ton of money super quickly. Unfortunately it was about a week too late. It's all about fundraising in Congress and Amy had proven she could raise money. Andrew Yang had a great podcast with a sports talk show host from Kentucky who predicted Mitch would win by more than anticipated. Said Kentucky does not like Mitch, but they do not think the Democrats like them. Booker is different Amy is the typical Kentucy democrat who gets smoked by these dinosaurs like Mcconnell and Pence. Democratic outreach in the middle of the country is obviously lacking and why it makes absolutely no sense for Nancy, Chuck, and Tom Perez to continue.

[Appleshampoo]

You mean more BS? Those sauces are the absolute worst.

I get concerned when they have actual numbers. Hope the source is garbage

No seriously, those sources are garbage. OANN and ChanelRion are one and the same. As in ChanelRion works for OANN and that organization is even worse than Fox News. They might as well rebrand themselves as TrumpTV. They are on the level of Brietbart or Project Veritas which is sublevel.

If those numbers were real, we will start to see actual sources like NPR, Reuters, or the AP corroborate quickly - and I haven't seen anything from them.

If this was true at all the courts wouldn't reject the Trump lawyers cases.

[omerome]

McGrath described herself as a “Trump Democrat.” And the DNC supported her over Booker!!! What appalling stupidity. Schumer is an idiot.

And that was the beginning of the end of her campaign. Like why would this sound like a good idea?

So she's a watered-down version of an idiot? Well, guess what? She's still an idiot.

If you’re going to go down, at least go down fighting for something.

And that's the ultimate message right there.

The Democrats need to show their voters what exactly they are fighting for. People are tired of choosing the lesser of two evils. I really wish someone would ask someone like Manchin or Clyburn what they are fighting for. I mean straight up ask him what the message the Democrats should be moving forward. Because the Democrats have a really bad messaging problem.

And with the upcoming runoffs, if they use the same message they did before like, "Don't vote for the Republicans" because they're bad, they will lose again. And there won't be Progressives to blame or point fingers at.

[HarthorneWingo]

And that was the beginning of the end of her campaign. Like why would this sound like a good idea?

So she's a watered-down version of an idiot? Well, guess what? She's still an idiot.

If you’re going to go down, at least go down fighting for something.

And that's the ultimate message right there.

The Democrats need to show their voters what exactly they are fighting for. People are tired of choosing the lesser of two evils. I really wish someone would ask someone like Manchin or Clyburn what they are fighting for. I mean straight up ask him what the message the Democrats should be moving forward. Because the Democrats have a really bad messaging problem.

And with the upcoming runoffs, if they use the same message they did before like, "Don't vote for the Republicans" because they're bad, they will lose again. And there won't be Progressives to blame or point fingers at.

Hakeem Jeffries is already talking shyt at AOC. It's on.

Read on Twitter

?s=20

[omerome]

I get concerned when they have actual numbers. Hope the source is garbage

No seriously, those sources are garbage. OANN and ChanelRion are one and the same. As in ChanelRion works for OANN and that organization is even worse than Fox News. They might as well rebrand themselves as TrumpTV. They are on the level of Brietbart or Project Veritas which is sublevel.

If those numbers were real, we will start to see actual sources like NPR, Reuters, or the AP corroborate quickly - and I haven't seen anything from them.

If this was true at all the courts wouldn't reject the Trump lawyers cases.

I don't get it. The courts are rejecting the cases because those lawyers lack any evidence. Then again, those lawyers are still getting paid to present those cases to the courts so regardless of the outcome, it's money in the bank for them.

[omerome]

If you’re going to go down, at least go down fighting for something.

And that's the ultimate message right there.

The Democrats need to show their voters what exactly they are fighting for. People are tired of choosing the lesser of two evils. I really wish someone would ask someone like Manchin or Clyburn what they are fighting for. I mean straight up ask him what the message the Democrats should be moving forward. Because the Democrats have a really bad messaging problem.

And with the upcoming runoffs, if they use the same message they did before like, "Don't vote for the Republicans" because they're bad, they will lose again. And there won't be Progressives to blame or point fingers at.

Hakeem Jeffries is already talking shyt at AOC. It's on.

Read on Twitter

?s=20

SMH. What a dumb statement to make there, Hakeem.

The Democrats are the ones without a clear message and that's coming from the top. Why isn't the SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE and her deputies coming up with winning formulas so they can stop getting destroyed in places they need representation? You don't blame a newly hired paralegal for a failing mission statement, you look at the CEO.

Pelosi and her deputies are essentially the shareholders of the Democratic party. They should communicate their vision/mission statement so everyone in the organization is on the same page. Not someone like AOC - unless they're ready to promote her...

[Fury]

Looks like they found something?

Read on Twitter

You mean more BS? Those sauces are the absolute worst.

I get concerned when they have actual numbers. Hope the source is garbage

Dude, be careful. If you may or may not fall for something like this, imagine what the average dumbass falls for.

[Oscirus]

And that's the ultimate message right there.

The Democrats need to show their voters what exactly they are fighting for. People are tired of choosing the lesser of two evils. I really wish someone would ask someone like Manchin or Clyburn what they are fighting for. I mean straight up ask him what the message the Democrats should be moving forward. Because the Democrats have a really bad messaging problem.

And with the upcoming runoffs, if they use the same message they did before like, "Don't vote for the Republicans" because they're bad, they will lose again. And there won't be Progressives to blame or point fingers at.

Hakeem Jeffries is already talking shyt at AOC. It's on.

Read on Twitter

?s=20

SMH. What a dumb statement to make there, Hakeem.

The Democrats are the ones without a clear message and that's coming from the top. Why isn't the SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE and her deputies coming up with winning formulas so they can stop getting destroyed in places they need representation? You don't blame a newly hired paralegal for a failing mission statement, you look at the CEO.

Pelosi and her deputies are essentially the shareholders of the Democratic party. They should communicate their vision/mission statement so everyone in the organization is on the same page. Not someone like AOC - unless they're ready to promote her...

At this point the dems are gonna deserve exactly what they get. After Biden, theres no more obama to save you idjits from yourselves. If progressives are hijacking the message, it's the leaderships job to rein it in HAKEEM. But they clearly havent and turning progressives into the boogeyman in some lame attempt to save face is (Please Use More Appropriate Word) and if you drive them from the party, what are you going to do then? If this election showed us anything, its that dems need every vote that they can get.

[HarthorneWingo]

Well, well, well. This is a very interesting report out of Vox.com. Trump is going to SHOCK THE WORLD!

https://www.vox.com/21560260/trump-pentagon-defense-secretary-esper-afghanistan

But experts I spoke to doubt those (i.e. coup attempt) explanations, and suspect what’s really going on is that Trump finally had an opening to clean house at the Pentagon with the election now over, and that he’s putting in people more amenable to his wishes in order to finally accomplish some of the policies the Esper-led Pentagon had pushed back on — such as withdrawing all remaining US troops from Afghanistan before Christmas.

Trump promised in October that those troops would be home by the holiday. But while the White House pushed hard on the Pentagon to fulfill that wish, Defense Department leaders resisted, saying instead any withdrawal needed to be “conditions-based” — in other words, when violence in Afghanistan wasn’t spiking.

That set off a months-long back and forth that ended with the White House angry at the Pentagon. A White House official told me O’Brien, the national security adviser, had a bad relationship with Esper and wanted him out, recommending to Trump that Miller take his place. Trump seems to have listened, and now the pathway is open for the troop withdrawal the president wants.

On Wednesday, Axios reported that Douglas Macgregor, a Fox News contributor and veteran who has long advocated for pulling US troops out of the Middle East, just joined the Pentagon as an adviser to Miller. That bolsters the claim that the moves are really about an expedited troop withdrawal more than anything else.

That explanation should assuage concerns that the real goal here is for these staffers to “burrow” themselves at the Pentagon, meaning a Biden administration couldn’t remove them from their posts. But such fears are unfounded, according to Loren DeJonge Schulman, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security think tank in Washington, DC.

She told me that all the new Pentagon civilian leaders are political appointees. Biden, then, can easily have them removed once he enters office in January. “Political appointees serve at the pleasure of the president,” Schulman said.

Put together, vigilance and skepticism of the moves are completely fair and warranted. But there’s no evidence that something nefarious is afoot, at least not yet.