2020 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - RULES IN OP

[zonacats8]

Originally Posted by jarrodsalas

I agree. This will not be an exciting time for them. No possibility of working together but what did they change over the past 4 years...or attempt to change. They set the new standard for dirty politics.

Are you saying the Democrats set a new standard for dirty politics over the last 4 years?

Seriously? with everything the GOP has done you think it's the Dems who stooped to a new low?

Wow

[jarrodsalas]

Originally Posted by zonacats8

Are you saying the Democrats set a new standard for dirty politics over the last 4 years?

Seriously? with everything the GOP has done you think it's the Dems who stooped to a new low?

Wow

4 years of hate from the left towards a man that was bringing back a strong economy. Wow.

[senorlaverga]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

I was that in 2008. First vote, first time I lost. Since then, I've lost in 2012, 2016 AND 2020! (When I say lost, the vote I cast for President was for the loser in my state. McCain in FL in '08, Romney in FL in '12, and Trump twice in CT '16 & '20)

My first was 1992. I voted for Clinton.
Then in 1996 I was a cocky Gen X-er and penciled in the singer of Slayer.
Since then I've been red, so, mixed results. I maintain that if McCain wouldn't have flip-flopped and gone party line at the end in 2008, he would've won.

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by EBCollectibles

I believe the Democrats are fixing to get a dose of their own medicine in a much stronger way. It has been building up and is probably about to explode in a bad way. Trump's falsehoods? You must be watching CNN. Tell Anderson and Lemon to keep watching I'm afraid it is going to get rough sooner than later.

Because the democrats weren’t responding to what the republicans did while Obama was in office. Merrick Garland? Cmon.

One party, at one point, needs to step up to work together and stop this dumb divisive d*ck measuring contest.

[mattglet]

Originally Posted by jarrodsalas

4 years of hate from the left towards a man that was bringing back a strong economy. Wow.

Lol "bringing back". I have some historical data to show you.

[pharmboymatt]

Originally Posted by EBCollectibles

I believe the Democrats are fixing to get a dose of their own medicine in a much stronger way. It has been building up and is probably about to explode in a bad way. Trump's falsehoods? You must be watching CNN. Tell Anderson and Lemon to keep watching I'm afraid it is going to get rough sooner than later.

Fixin' to get deplorable, eh? Muh antifa or muh BLM?

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by jewcer2k5

Because the democrats weren’t responding to what the republicans did while Obama was in office. Merrick Garland? Cmon.

One party, at one point, needs to step up to work together and stop this dumb divisive d*ck measuring contest.

Whichever party does that, will get absolutely slaughtered in the next election.

I understand the sentiment and the thought but we are well beyond that possible reality.

[Eckstein197]

One thing that’s not disputable is the republicans were 100% hypocritical about the Supreme Court. Merrick Garland should have been nominated to the Supreme Court. They waited roughly 7-8 months after Scanlin’s death and after the election, and this time around because the republicans stood to benefit, they got ACB nominated in less than 2 months

Absolute hypocrisy

[GOWIFB]

Originally Posted by Onions

Jesus, we are watching our democratic process work before our eyes. There are always challenges and disputes. We have 240+ years of it on the books. Trust the system, don't listen to the noise, and stop worrying about some crazy crackpot theories. The right guy will win.

I understand there may be challenges if the vote is close. There are probably always going to be questions if there are some votes that weren't cast properly, for example if they didn't meet residency requirements, if they have been convicted of a felony, etc. However it is unprecedented for a sitting president, or any candidate for that matter, to be openly claiming massive fraud for months leading up to the election, and again immediately after the election while votes are still being counted. Trump filed multiple lawsuits to get the count to stop. You can't just stop the count once you are ahead. Once the count is completed if there is legitimate concern that there are improper ballots then the state will investigate. And of course if it is really close, no matter who is ahead, there will be a recount. Most recounts only result in the change of hundreds of votes but of course in a close election that could make a difference.

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

Whichever party does that, will get absolutely slaughtered in the next election.

I understand the sentiment and the thought but we are well beyond that possible reality.

If we can’t get back there it don’t matter what happens we are f*cked as a country.

[jarrodsalas]

Originally Posted by mattglet

Lol "bringing back". I have some historical data to show you.

Many industries saw a huge slump during the Obama era. Prove me wrong.

[mcgoo2]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

He never said these things on Twitter though right? Was a podcast on a YouTube I believe. And Twitter banned him for something he said; not on Twitter?

It is a show run through Youtube, yeah. I'm not a big Twitter user so I'm not sure but I think Twitter streams through Youtube. I'm not really going to cry for him either way, it just kind of reminded me that Bannon and his ilk will lose quite a bit of clout with Trump out. Nice added benefit if the election goes the way it's looking.

[BoxBreaker72]

Originally Posted by Eckstein197

One thing that’s not disputable is the republicans were 100% hypocritical about the Supreme Court. Merrick Garland should have been nominated to the Supreme Court. They waited roughly 7-8 months after Scanlin’s death and after the election, and this time around because the republicans stood to benefit, they got ACB nominated in less than 2 months

Absolute hypocrisy

Sure they were.

However none of that matters because had Obama had the senate they would have done the exact same damn thing.

You know it, I know it.

Politics by definition are hypocritical. On both sides.

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by Eckstein197

One thing that’s not disputable is the republicans were 100% hypocritical about the Supreme Court. Merrick Garland should have been nominated to the Supreme Court. They waited roughly 7-8 months after Scanlin’s death and after the election, and this time around because the republicans stood to benefit, they got ACB nominated in less than 2 months

Absolute hypocrisy

I enjoyed the combination of Antonin Scalia to form "Scanlin" but I would have chosen "Antlia". Dealers choice I suppose.

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by jewcer2k5

If we can’t get back there it don’t matter what happens we are f*cked as a country.

Nah, I think we're gonna be OK.

The division sucks; but it also works to our advantage when it comes to governance. Allowing complete control by left or right is unhealthy and when you consider we have a POTUS, House, Senate, SCOTUS; there's almost always going to be a check in place to keep us grounded somewhere around the middle.

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

Nah, I think we're gonna be OK.

The division sucks; but it also works to our advantage when it comes to governance. Allowing complete control by left or right is unhealthy and when you consider we have a POTUS, House, Senate, SCOTUS; there's almost always going to be a check in place to keep us grounded somewhere around the middle.

Nothing will get done. Absolutely nothing. Then the next cycles will be “they didn’t do anything”. “They wouldn’t let us do anything or work with us”.

Then more of the same.

Agree that split control is best but work together for the people of the country.

[yanksfan1]

So whenever Biden does his victory speech, does he troll Trump and play "YMCA" as the walkout song?

[Onions]

Originally Posted by GOWIFB

I understand there may be challenges if the vote is close. There are probably always going to be questions if there are some votes that weren't cast properly, for example if they didn't meet residency requirements, if they have been convicted of a felony, etc. However it is unprecedented for a sitting president, or any candidate for that matter, to be openly claiming massive fraud for months leading up to the election, and again immediately after the election while votes are still being counted. Trump filed multiple lawsuits to get the count to stop. You can't just stop the count once you are ahead. Once the count is completed if there is legitimate concern that there are improper ballots then the state will investigate. And of course if it is really close, no matter who is ahead, there will be a recount. Most recounts only result in the change of hundreds of votes but of course in a close election that could make a difference.

Stop the count, or stop the count until observation can occur? Big difference. Don't worry, your guy is gonna win. Sleep easy my friend. Our government is still alive and working correctly.

[GOWIFB]

Originally Posted by yanksfan1

So whenever Biden does his victory speech, does he troll Trump and play "YMCA" as the walkout song?

Wow that is an excellent idea if Biden were to win. I don't think he has it in him to do that though, especially given that Trump is continuing to challenge everything. Probably don't want to tick him off anymore than he already is.

[EBCollectibles]

Originally Posted by zonacats8

Are you saying the Democrats set a new standard for dirty politics over the last 4 years?

Seriously? with everything the GOP has done you think it's the Dems who stooped to a new low?

Wow

Stevie Wonder that is exactly what he is saying or would you rather be called Ray Charles. You better buckle your seat belts it's about to get rough.

[jarrodsalas]

Originally Posted by yanksfan1

So whenever Biden does his victory speech, does he troll Trump and play "YMCA" as the walkout song?

Despacito for the hispanic minority that saw right through him. Kind of suprising as they normally don't sway.

[Onepocketj]

PA at 23k. Was hoping he would catch him tonight

[EBCollectibles]

Originally Posted by GOWIFB

Wow that is an excellent idea if Biden were to win. I don't think he has it in him to do that though, especially given that Trump is continuing to challenge everything. Probably don't want to tick him off anymore than he already is.

Biden isn't worried about doing that kind of stuff he is worried about who is going to rub his hairy legs.

[pharmboymatt]

Originally Posted by EBCollectibles

Biden isn't worried about doing that kind of stuff he is worried about who is going to rub his hairy legs.

Ivanka is busy servicing Trump. Not sure which one. But you deplorables are all about dat incest

[Eckstein197]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

I enjoyed the combination of Antonin Scalia to form "Scanlin" but I would have chosen "Antlia". Dealers choice I suppose.

Terrible spelling, that’s my bad. That’s actually the last name of an old professor of mine, but yeah shouldn’t have messed up that name