Get ready for four more years (at least) of Trumplandia
September 18, 2020 at 5:07 pm #33242
Ivy thinks we’re going to have to accept four more years of Trump. I’ve been optimistic about dumping the dude until recently. Here’s a little essay explaining my position now:
I’m slowly becoming convinced that no matter what, Trump will still be in office after Inauguration Day 2021.
The reason I think this is that clearly the GOP will pull out all the stops and show no restraint whatsoever to win, from keeping millions of likely Dems from voting, to court challenges forcing the right-leaning Supreme Court to decide the election (for which there’s precedent: that’s how Gore lost to Bush in 2000), to state legislatures changing their instructions to their state’s electors to throw additional electoral votes Trump’s way. And yes, that is absolutely constitutional.
Several magazine articles* have explained how Trump and the GOP can manipulate things to secure a win, even if he loses the popular vote much more badly than he did versus Clinton. They are worthwhile but scary reads, especially the Newsweek article.
By contrast, the Democrats are simply not nearly as cutthroat. They stay in their lane. They refuse to cheat or bend rules. They will complain but that’s about it.
Once in office, don’t be surprised if Trump goes to work on getting a third term by amending the Constitution or simply by engineering a coup to stay in power. At that point, the only hope is a military who hates him enough to defy their tradition of staying out of politics, not to mention the law. And do we really want a banana republic-style solution?
Another way of effectively staying in power is to install a puppet in his place: Don Jr.? Ivanka? Jared Kirshner? Bill Barr?
Am I the only one starting to feel that it’s hopeless?
The GOP has totally lost its moral compass in its determination to keep rich whites in power in defiance of demographic trends away from caucasians. They also feel that driving the country back to pre-1960’s values is morally justified no matter what it takes. “The end justifies the means.”
I hope I’m wrong, but this is what I’m seeing as a very possible future right now.
And a little googling will reveal at least a dozen othersSeptember 18, 2020 at 5:28 pm #33243
I don’t think Trump has a chance of winning the election legitimately. Does it matter? He won’t leave voluntarily. Either he is forcibly removed or we have the consequences of our acquiescence.September 19, 2020 at 1:45 am #33244
Things just got much worse. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died. Senator Mitch McConnell, who runs the Senate, has assured everyone that there will be a conservative replacement for the ultra-liberal Ginsberg before Inauguration Day. So this will happen no matter who wins the presidency. If Biden wins, he’ll have a very very conservative Supreme Court.
And in that case, Biden’s only options are nuclear. He can set about impeaching Justices and/or stack the court by adding liberal Justices. The number of Justices is not set by the Constitution. By doing either, he just invites the Republicans to do the same when it’s next their turn.
September 19, 2020 at 5:37 am #33246
- This reply was modified 1 month, 1 week ago by Unseen.
I told you unseen he’s going to do whatever it takes, he’s going to lie steal and cheat his way there. He already has and he already is. And his sheep supporters are going to continue to enable him. Get that Canadian visa in order LOL… Get the hell out of Dodge because this country is up shit creek. It’s been that way now for a while. Unfortunately we need to realize that D’Nile is not just a river in Egypt. This country is really done for. I knew that the day Trump became the candidate – It was so obvious. We really are royally fucked up the ass. There is one hope. I really hope the motherfucker just gets the coronavirus and dies. That would help a little bit. It would serve him goddamn right.September 19, 2020 at 4:22 pm #33247
He’s already done so much damage along with that evil genius from Kentucky, Sen. Mitch McConnell, who has rammed through 216 Federal judges (lifetime terms) with 220 possible by Election Day. Thus, anything Biden does, should he win, would likely be run through a gauntlet of conservative (and in many cases unqualified) judges before it even got to the Supreme Court.September 19, 2020 at 5:10 pm #33248
Reg the Fronkey FarmerModeratorSeptember 19, 2020 at 7:09 pm #33249
Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator
Mitch didn’t waste much time, did he? Do the Democrats have a secret weapon to thwart a rapid Ginsburg replacement?September 19, 2020 at 7:31 pm #33250
Mitch didn’t waste much time, did he? Do the Democrats have a secret weapon to thwart a rapid Ginsburg replacement?
I love alternet.org but they are very aggressive in terms of forcing visitors to turn off their ad blockers. Unfortunately, I’ve found that even after you create an exception for them (called “whitelisting”), they think you haven’t. This article is important, so I’m giving you the full text in case the following link doesn’t work.
HERE ARE 3 WAYS MCCONNELL’S DRIVE TO REPLACE GINSBURG COULD BE DERAILED
Reacting to the announcement that Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away on late Friday, Daily Beast columnist Michael Tomasky warned that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was likely up late plotting ramming through her replacement while he still has control of the Senate and with few impediments.
Reflecting on how McConnell blocked hearings for Judge Merrick Garland after he was nominated to the court in President Barack Obama’s last year in office, Tomasky said no one should expect McConnell will chart the same course when it comes to whomever Donald Trump nominates less than 50 days before the November 2020 election.
“It’s sick because, as we know, this same McConnell back in 2016 thought that February of an election year—February, not September!—was too late for a president to name a new justice in an election year. But that, of course, was when the president was a Democrat,” the Daily Beast columnist wrote before adding, “Place yourself in the White House private residence, or down in Louisville, at Chez Mitch, when the news about Ginsburg was conveyed Friday. Do you think either of them took even 30 seconds to reflect on her service to her nation?”
With that in mind, the longtime political observer noted there are three possible scenarios where quickly placing another conservative on the high court could be derailed.
At the top of the list would be Democrats serving notice to McConnell that, should he try and force the issue and get a vote in before the election, they will expand the number of justices on the court if they take control of the Senate and the White House after the election.
As Tomasky put it, “Some Democratic senators who might have Mitch’s ear, say Joe Manchin, will go to him. And Mitch will say: F*ck off. However, the Democrats have a card to play here, if Joe Biden will play it. The number nine (of Supreme Court justices) is neither in the Constitution nor law. Biden, and Chuck Schumer, can say: If you fill this seat now, if Biden wins, we’re expanding the Court to 11 or 13, and your majority is dead. And they should be ready to do it.”
Secondly, the Senate Majority Leader may read the tea leaves when it comes to polling on the issue of a late Supreme Court replacement with the election in the offing and, if sentiment is overwhelmingly against it, may take a pass lest he damage the Republican Party even more than Donald Trump has already done. As the columnist put it: “As I’ve often written, our democracy is corrupted and screwed, but it’s still enough of a democracy that public opinion actually matters.”
Lastly, McConnell who is desperately trying to hold onto power in the Senate may be able to save some GOP-held Senate seats that are poised to flip if he holds off. “
Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski, not up for re-election, has apparently said she will not confirm a justice until the next president is sworn in,” he wrote. “That’s one. Democrats would need three more to say that they’ll follow Murkowski’s lead. Susan Collins, Cory Gardner, and Martha McSally seem the obvious choices. There are others. It all depends on the degree of progressive mobilizing in those states, to make those GOP senators know that if they acquiesce to McConnell’s games, they will lose.”September 19, 2020 at 10:40 pm #33251
It’s preposterous to claim to know the result of an election six weeks before it happens (and with three presidential debates in between). Americans are obsessed with “already calling things” well before anything is clear. And they have total amnesia about it every single time they are wrong. Clinton was a totally obvious sure thing, except for those who totally predicted Trump would win (and were right because of their miraculous foresight). So much shit can happen from now until then including blunders, wild shifts in voting intentions, terrible debate performances, unpredictable disasters and so on. Even a week before the election it would be absurd to call it a sure thing.
It’s common knowledge Trump will do whatever it takes to win. He does and says despicable things every day to get there completely unmoved by the carnage that comes in its way. That doesn’t mean he will win. It is not four years ago. And it is not yet six weeks from now. Stop calling an election and do whatever you can to motivate people you know to vote Biden and to encourage people you know to get out and actually vote (or get their mail-in ballots if possible). If you can even help people sign up for their ballots then do it.September 19, 2020 at 10:56 pm #33252
PopeBeanieModeratorI came here as soon as I learned she died. I’ve feared for a long time this was one of the worst things that could happen, even if Trump ultimately loses 2020.
[…] That doesn’t mean he will win. It is not four years ago. And it is not yet six weeks from now. Stop calling an election and do whatever you can to motivate people you know to vote Biden and to encourage people you know to get out and actually vote (or get their mail-in ballots if possible). If you can even help people sign up for their ballots then do it.
I haven’t chimed in until now because I’ve also felt that predictions are truly meaningless, up until at least the last few weeks of rampant pollings and speculations.
Meanwhile IMO, further stacking SCOTUS (after forcing delay in consideration of nominees back in 2016) would be one of the most corrupt acts of partisan politics in American history, and in clear disrespect for the majority of Americans who voted in Nov 2016. We may see how the electoral college system can now lead to its own form of corruption in political power, unforeseen when the constitution was written in the late 1700s.September 19, 2020 at 11:35 pm #33253
Davis you make a point about elections that i made half a year ago. I said we have no idea which events or circumstances will transpire and influence this election. Indeed there have been major developments.
However this election is distinguishable from prior in that Trump is incredibly polarizing. He is worshipped as white jesus or despised and reviled like fetid garbage. (There is an incredibly successful prognosticator who has examined history of US elections and decided on the most important factors and debate performance is not one of those.) Emotions run high. Very few Americans are undecided and weighing the evidence. Apparently there are only about 8 percent who can be swayed.
Based on polling Trump is losing. He needs the unmoored votes to go his way. But the pandemic is surely going to make those undecideds go against him. Trump continues to reject science and medicine. The one thing that has recently come to my attention that gives me pause is the extremism of the left and specifically BLM. The rioting and looting may swing some to Trump. And the character of the BLM movement and the nutty Bernie supporters may result in some who refuse to vote for either candidate. Further Joe and Kamala have failed to distinguish between legit protestors and lawless thugs. Thus some of the independents may fear the dems.
So maybe i am mistaken. But i still don’t see Trump winning legit election. Neither do i see him admitting defeat and stepping aside.September 20, 2020 at 12:02 am #33255
Jake, read that Newsweek article about how Trump can lose the election but remain President.
One of the things I fear the most is that Trump, having lost the popular vote, perhaps by an even greater margin, is still just a few EC votes away from winning. Since the GOP tends to run the state legislatures, especially in swing states, there is time after the election but before the Dec 14 day of the EC election, for state legislators to change how Electoral College votes are distributed from “Winner takes all electors” to “Divide the electors proportionally.”
So, to pull an example out of my ass, take a state with 29 electors, change to proportional, and now Biden gets 15 electors but Trump gets 14, enough for him to win. And maybe it’s not just one state that does this. Maybe it’s 2 or 3!
It’s legal and don’t think the GOP won’t do it. They are desperate to win even if it’s openly fraudulent. They’ll figure they get to roll back the clock on progress and that eventually people will largely forget about it.
By totally distorting the legal system, with the expert help of Bill Barr, he can gain control of the mainstream press, suppress the marginal press, and bingo, we’re in 1984.September 20, 2020 at 12:52 am #33256
The only current swing states with a Republican trifecta is Florida. Ohio, Iowa and Arizona. I’ve taken a look at all four states and:Florida has the slimmest majority in the Senate. It’s unlikely a super contentious bill like that would pass there…especially in a state with a serious history of voting supression and electoral disaster. In Iowa and Arizona the Republicans have a slim majority in BOTH houses so again, it seems even more unlikely contentious bills would pass. Ohio is a different story with a super majority in the senate and a very comfortable majority in the house. But it seems that they would have to change their constitution for this to happen which requires 3/5ths pass in both houses (maybe possible) and a state referendum (most likely during presidential elections) and this referendum can only happen 90 days after the legislation is passed meaning there wouldn’t be time for it to pass before the electoral college.
In the case of long shots, for example in Georgia and Texas there is a small chance of them voting Democrat. In Texas you’d only need 7 dissenting representatives for a law not to be passed in the house. Georgia has a more comfortable majority in both houses. I cannot find out how the laws could be changed in Texas or Georgia. Not sure if it is feasible for them to change state law in those four weeks and if such laws could survive legal challenges (changing how they are distributed AFTER the election has taken place seems legally very dubious).
September 20, 2020 at 1:58 am #33258
- This reply was modified 1 month ago by Davis.
The only current swing states with a Republican trifecta is Florida. Ohio, Iowa and Arizona. I’ve taken a look at all four states and:Florida has the slimmest majority in the Senate. It’s unlikely a super contentious bill like that would pass there…especially in a state with a serious history of voting supression and electoral disaster. In Iowa and Arizona the Republicans have a slim majority in BOTH houses so again, it seems even more unlikely contentious bills would pass. Ohio is a different story with a super majority in the senate and a very comfortable majority in the house. But it seems that they would have to change their constitution for this to happen which requires 3/5ths pass in both houses (maybe possible) and a state referendum (most likely during presidential elections) and this referendum can only happen 90 days after the legislation is passed meaning there wouldn’t be time for it to pass before the electoral college. In the case of long shots, for example in Georgia and Texas there is a small chance of them voting Democrat. In Texas you’d only need 7 dissenting representatives for a law not to be passed in the house. Georgia has a more comfortable majority in both houses. I cannot find out how the laws could be changed in Texas or Georgia. Not sure if it is feasible for them to change state law in those four weeks and if such laws could survive legal challenges (changing how they are distributed AFTER the election has taken place seems legally very dubious).
If Trump’s attorneys flood the courts with lawsuits to delay a final decision, it goes to the Supreme Court, which WILL decide the election in the favor of the GOP, especially now with RBG gone. Checkmate! Even if the sometimes unpredictable Chief Justice John Roberts, who is a conservative at heart, were to side with the two remaining liberal justices, that leaves the decision in the hands of the five remaining justices, all conservative.
September 20, 2020 at 2:56 am #33260
- This reply was modified 1 month ago by Unseen.
Do the legalities play a role when he has decided he is not leaving?
March on DC Tcultists. Now what?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.