Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #401  
Old 07-22-2019, 11:04 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
Well, as much as I would like to see Donnie impeached, I'm prepared to admit that it is extremely unlikely.

But at the end of the day, there will be sufficient 'sealed indictments', state and federal charges against him that after he leaves office, he'll spend a few years and most of his wealth attempting to defend himself against all of them and likely end up with prison terms both at the state and federal level.

Whether anyone on the right wants to admit it or not, he's committed so many crimes through his family, his companies, his charity, et al that he's not going to be allowed to retired peacefully and be a thorn in every future president's administrations.

Not to say he won't constantly run his mouth about them.
  #402  
Old 07-22-2019, 11:11 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 26,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
Yes, that's a possibility. Or McConnell could tell the House managers that they can have the hour between 4 and 5am on Sunday/Monday night to make their case, and then the full Senate will vote at 9am on that Monday.

All perfectly legal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
I for one got your point about who schedules it. I just think McConnell wouldn't not schedule the trial. Why take a chance on riling up some otherwise non voters when the Senate will surely vote not to convict?
I concede that y'all have a point but I'm not convinced that McConnell will allow any sunlight to shine on anything if he doesn't have to.

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 07-22-2019 at 11:12 PM.
  #403  
Old 07-23-2019, 12:28 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 3,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
I concede that y'all have a point but I'm not convinced that McConnell will allow any sunlight to shine on anything if he doesn't have to.
Okay, but unless I missed it I don't think I agree with what Sherred has said. I don't see McConnell pulling any type of shenanigans as far ad a Senate trial is concerned.
  #404  
Old 07-23-2019, 06:48 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
I don't see McConnell pulling any type of shenanigans as far ad a Senate trial is concerned.
I don't either, but only because there won't be an impeachment until after the Resident's own party repudiates him, whatever the chances of that may be, and there's a likelihood of a removal vote. McConnell is essentially a party man, not a Trump man except by convenience, and he's certainly not an America man.
  #405  
Old 07-23-2019, 10:40 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
I for one got your point about who schedules it. I just think McConnell wouldn't not schedule the trial. Why take a chance on riling up some otherwise non voters when the Senate will surely vote not to convict?
If he lets the Senate trial happen, then at a minimum he would have to allow the House impeachment managers to make their case against Trump on the Senate floor with the whole nation watching, informing the nation in no uncertain terms of the specifics of Trump's high crimes.

Sure, the Senate would still vote to acquit, but it would damage both Trump and the GOP Senators who voted to acquit, and it would likely help boost Dem turnout.

Or Mitch could just deny them that forum. The flak about "why didn't you have a trial" would fall on him, he'd still get re-elected, and he'd shield his Senators from having to cast a vote that would hurt many of them either way they cast it.

It's becoming clear that the House won't impeach, that Pelosi will stall and stall. But if they did, I'd bet a healthy sum that there would be no Senate trial.
  #406  
Old 07-23-2019, 11:02 AM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 26,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
If he lets the Senate trial happen, then at a minimum he would have to allow the House impeachment managers to make their case against Trump on the Senate floor with the whole nation watching, informing the nation in no uncertain terms of the specifics of Trump's high crimes.

Sure, the Senate would still vote to acquit, but it would damage both Trump and the GOP Senators who voted to acquit, and it would likely help boost Dem turnout.

Or Mitch could just deny them that forum. The flak about "why didn't you have a trial" would fall on him, he'd still get re-elected, and he'd shield his Senators from having to cast a vote that would hurt many of them either way they cast it.

It's becoming clear that the House won't impeach, that Pelosi will stall and stall. But if they did, I'd bet a healthy sum that there would be no Senate trial.
Yep.
  #407  
Old 07-23-2019, 12:37 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 3,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
If he lets the Senate trial happen, then at a minimum he would have to allow the House impeachment managers to make their case against Trump on the Senate floor with the whole nation watching, informing the nation in no uncertain terms of the specifics of Trump's high crimes.

Sure, the Senate would still vote to acquit, but it would damage both Trump and the GOP Senators who voted to acquit, and it would likely help boost Dem turnout.
I agree completely. I've made the argument before about it hurting Trump, helping the Dems, and maybe doing enough damage to Rep senators that maybe one might flip. No one as of yet, whom I've tried to convince of this, will say this is at least a possibility.

Quote:
Or Mitch could just deny them that forum. The flak about "why didn't you have a trial" would fall on him, he'd still get re-elected, and he'd shield his Senators from having to cast a vote that would hurt many of them either way they cast it.

It's becoming clear that the House won't impeach, that Pelosi will stall and stall. But if they did, I'd bet a healthy sum that there would be no Senate trial.
Okay, but I stand by my belief (and admittedly it may be more a hope) that if it comes to it, even McConnell will not risk the fallout of preventing a senate trial. The only question now, is, what's a healthy sum?
  #408  
Old 07-23-2019, 01:02 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,674
<Future Mitch McConnell>

We cannot let the gang of socialist America-hating conduct this witch-hunt any longer. The leader of the anti-democratic party, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wants to take over the country. We must stand firm with the American People, and stop her and her gang of unamerican fake news promoters. These hateful socialist women, together with the America-hating deep state will never take over our country.

This is why we will not hold a trial in the Senate. The American People are 100% behind us and our great, Dear Leader today.

(applause erupts from 50 senators)
  #409  
Old 07-23-2019, 01:13 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 3,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
<Future Mitch McConnell>
...
I'm not sure how serious you are being here, but funny stuff nonetheless.

But McConnell, I think, is more given to quotes like the following, regarding the Garland nomination:

Quote:
“What I did was entirely consistent with what the history of the Senate has been in that situation, going back to 1880,” McConnell said.
And what has been entirely consistent with what the Senate has done when the House voted to impeach, is that they had a trial each time. McConnell will need a hell of a reasonable explanation as to why he would prevent a trial, one that he can convince people of is not political in nature. I don't see what even Mitch could come with.
  #410  
Old 07-23-2019, 01:14 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
<Future Mitch McConnell>

We cannot let the gang of socialist America-hating conduct this witch-hunt any longer. The leader of the anti-democratic party, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wants to take over the country. We must stand firm with the American People, and stop her and her gang of unamerican fake news promoters. These hateful socialist women, together with the America-hating deep state will never take over our country.

This is why we will not hold a trial in the Senate. The American People are 100% behind us and our great, Dear Leader today.

(applause erupts from 50 senators)
Yep. No trial. And it wont hurt Mitch .... maybe a little from some independents. he will win re-election by 10% instead of 15%.
  #411  
Old 07-23-2019, 01:52 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 26,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
I'm not sure how serious you are being here, but funny stuff nonetheless.

But McConnell, I think, is more given to quotes like the following, regarding the Garland nomination:



And what has been entirely consistent with what the Senate has done when the House voted to impeach, is that they had a trial each time. McConnell will need a hell of a reasonable explanation as to why he would prevent a trial, one that he can convince people of is not political in nature. I don't see what even Mitch could come with.
No, he won't. He'll say any ddamned thing he wants and his constituents will re-elect him.
  #412  
Old 07-23-2019, 03:49 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 3,989
Well, then, Snowboarder Bo and DrDeth, since I've pretty much agreed to take RTFirefly up on a bet about whether there will be a trial if an impeachment happens, I suppose I should ask if you want a piece of this too. Assuming of course, that the bet is not too healthy. I mean, I'm comfortable with my stance, but I'm not an idiot!
  #413  
Old 07-23-2019, 04:03 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 26,855
40 quatloos on the newcomer!
  #414  
Old 07-23-2019, 05:59 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
Well, then, Snowboarder Bo and DrDeth, since I've pretty much agreed to take RTFirefly up on a bet about whether there will be a trial if an impeachment happens, I suppose I should ask if you want a piece of this too. Assuming of course, that the bet is not too healthy. I mean, I'm comfortable with my stance, but I'm not an idiot!
I say if there is one, it will be a quick show trial (if that), and Mitch wont let anything out. I will bet one Buffalo nickel.
  #415  
Old 07-23-2019, 06:09 PM
The Tooth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 4,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
I'm not sure how serious you are being here, but funny stuff nonetheless.

But McConnell, I think, is more given to quotes like the following, regarding the Garland nomination:



And what has been entirely consistent with what the Senate has done when the House voted to impeach, is that they had a trial each time. McConnell will need a hell of a reasonable explanation as to why he would prevent a trial, one that he can convince people of is not political in nature. I don't see what even Mitch could come with.
Why? What will happen if he doesn't have such an explanation? Who does he need to convince?

I find myself becoming more cynical about your system of checks and balances as time goes on.
__________________
"It would never occur to me to wear pink, just as it would never occur to Michael Douglas to play a poor person." - Sarah Vowell
  #416  
Old 07-23-2019, 06:51 PM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,999
My understanding is that by using the word "impeachment" more investigative options rise. More the better, far as I see it. Doesn't mean all the Dems have to march in lockstep shouting in one voice. "Moderates" can still urge caution and cowardice, still hedge their bets to see how it develops, see what new evidence can be brought before the people. Il Douche isn't going to shrug and shut up, he will scream bloody murder for every shoe that drops. The Dems don't have to, he will do it for them! As public sentiment evolves, the gutless wonders will edge closer. If it does not evolve, well, them's the breaks, but they lose nothing by biding their time. Failure is already the worst that can happen!

If a clear and overwhelming majority for impeachment arises, so much the better. If it cannot be accomplished before the next election, then let the Party of Darkness be seen as the obstinate obstruction to the people's will. Groovy.

It will be far too late for Republicans to get religion and try to change their stripes, and moderate Dems are not at risk. There are few strategic advantages better than patience and a really stupid enemy.

If this is Granny Pelosi's strategy, it is a good one, it keeps all the options open and advances the cause. She doesn't need to unify the moderates and the left, Il Douche will do that for us!
  #417  
Old 07-23-2019, 07:57 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39,255
Let's take the betting action to PM, gentlemen. Fiddle Peghead, there's a PM waiting for you.
  #418  
Old 07-23-2019, 09:16 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 3,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Let's take the betting action to PM, gentlemen. Fiddle Peghead, there's a PM waiting for you.
I just responded to it, I think. After all this time here, I still forget where the "Sent Messages" folder is, and I got no indication the message went thru.
  #419  
Old 07-23-2019, 09:20 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 3,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
40 quatloos on the newcomer!
Simpson's reference, or the "original"? Or both?

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 07-23-2019 at 09:20 PM.
  #420  
Old 07-23-2019, 09:22 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 3,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tooth View Post
Why? What will happen if he doesn't have such an explanation? Who does he need to convince?

I find myself becoming more cynical about your system of checks and balances as time goes on.
Geez, silly me, thinking that McConnell only acts based on things that are reasonable. But seriously, if he does try to stop it, I'm just saying that I think McConnell will feel he needs one.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 07-23-2019 at 09:22 PM.
  #421  
Old 07-23-2019, 11:43 PM
SlackerInc is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,997
You guys are overthinking this.

McConnell will pull any conceivable kind of procedural shit if he thinks most people aren’t paying attention. But to refuse to allow a trial would be a constitutional crisis and would be a huge huge news story. It would make it appear that he is afraid that Trump would lose this trial, when he can instead just let the same Republicans who would vote for this procedural motion vote against removal and then claim vindication without the firestorm.


Quote:
Originally Posted by thorny locust View Post
Yup, this sort of thing keeps coming around in circles, just often picking on a different group the next time around -- and all too often with the enthusiastic cooperation of many members of whatever group was targeted on the previous round.

Sad but true. There may be some kind of underlying sociological process that maintains an equilibrium. The 50-60% or so “whitest” voters will always consider themselves white and ally together against the “brownest” ones.

I have lived in several parts of the country, but where I have spent the past couple years is in northern Minnesota, where we have a vantage point to sort of see this dynamic from the outside. The vast majority of the population here is blue-eyed, with lots of red and natural blonde hair. (Guys with bushy red beards who look like Tormund from “Game of Thrones” are a dime a dozen here.) Then we also have a very visible population of recent Somalian immigrants. But the spectrum in between, of Italian Americans and so on, is almost entirely absent. So when my family visited New York City last summer, I felt like we were the only “white people” on the entire packed Staten Island Ferry, except for one other family that I subsequently noticed was speaking German to each other, LOL.

I had lived for a couple years in NYC in the late 90s, and remember feeling like there were white people all over the place. But now that I have gotten used to not being around people of southern European or Middle Eastern origin, my perceptions have shifted in the opposite way as happened over the twentieth century in the country overall.
  #422  
Old 07-24-2019, 12:20 AM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
Simpson's reference, or the "original"? Or both?
Original reference was Star Trek episode The Gamesters Of Triskelion
Stardate: 3211.7
Original Airdate: 5 Jan, 1968

And it was "Provider One bids three hundred quatloos for the newcomers. "
  #423  
Old 07-24-2019, 05:58 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
You guys are overthinking this.

McConnell will pull any conceivable kind of procedural shit if he thinks most people aren’t paying attention. But to refuse to allow a trial would be a constitutional crisis and would be a huge huge news story. It would make it appear that he is afraid that Trump would lose this trial, when he can instead just let the same Republicans who would vote for this procedural motion vote against removal and then claim vindication without the firestorm.
I think this is probably correct. Sure, McConnell could just block a trial, but if he already knows he has the votes to exonerate him, why not just have a dog-and-pony show trial and be done with it?
  #424  
Old 07-24-2019, 08:00 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Let's take the betting action to PM, gentlemen. Fiddle Peghead, there's a PM waiting for you.
Bringing this back into the thread to make it clear what my position is, since there seems to be some confusion:

If the House votes to impeach, the Senate will do nothing.

That's it. McConnell will not visibly stop a trial from happening. The Senate will stop it by not starting it to begin with, by engaging in exactly zero trial-related activities. (Which would of course be at McConnell's direction, whether anyone says so or not.) The House will impeach, and the Senate...<crickets>.
  #425  
Old 07-24-2019, 08:06 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
You guys are overthinking this.

McConnell will pull any conceivable kind of procedural shit if he thinks most people aren’t paying attention. But to refuse to allow a trial would be a constitutional crisis
Show me where the Constitution says the Senate has to have a trial if the House impeaches.

If the Constitution doesn't require it, then not having a trial would not be a Constitutional crisis.

And once again, McConnell doesn't have to actively 'refuse' anything. The Senate just does nothing.

And as far as McConnell only pulling procedural shit if people aren't paying attention, he got rid of the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations while everyone was watching, in order to confirm Gorsuch. He will change procedure in full view if he thinks there's enough to be gained.
  #426  
Old 07-24-2019, 09:45 AM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 26,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
Original reference was Star Trek episode The Gamesters Of Triskelion
Stardate: 3211.7
Original Airdate: 5 Jan, 1968

And it was "Provider One bids three hundred quatloos for the newcomers. "
The 40 quatloos line is from The Simpsons deleted scene, I think.

The line from the Gamesters is by Three: "A hundred quatloos on the newcomers."
  #427  
Old 07-25-2019, 06:20 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
The 40 quatloos line is from The Simpsons deleted scene, I think.

The line from the Gamesters is by Three: "A hundred quatloos on the newcomers."
What's that in Pesos?
  #428  
Old 07-25-2019, 06:23 PM
running coach's Avatar
running coach is online now
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 37,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-DUB View Post
What's that in Pesos?
https://walletinvestor.com/converter/quatloo/mxn/40
Quote:
40 Quatloo is 9.665997 Mexican Peso.
  #429  
Old 08-06-2019, 07:33 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,990
A couple of articles about Trump, violence, and hatred caught my attention while the board was down.

Here is a list of multiple acts of violence that appear to be inspired by Trump's rhetoric:

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckra...ut-in-his-name

Trump has explicitly called for, endorsed, or expressed approval for violence on multiple occasions, including violence against migrants: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...-worse/595453/

The same article also details how he's expressed sympathy for those with violent tendencies, and the direct implication that his supporters would be more skilled and capable of violence than his critics.

The latter link also argues that Trump is getting worse on this -- more and more he and his advertisements use words like "invasion" and "invaders" when referring to migrants.

It seems clear to me why he's doing this -- he has made no effort, and perhaps has no ability, to rhetorically reach out to moderate or minority voters. I think he and his team recognize that the only chance they have at a second term is to make sure every single supporter, including the hardcore racists and white supremacists, vote. He can't risk turning off the racists and white supremacists.
  #430  
Old 08-06-2019, 07:41 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,593
Trump wants to go to El Paso, but critics think it's a bad idea.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...-trump-1448020

Trump will go, particularly now that he's been told NOT to, and especially since he knows it'll inflame people in El Paso. He gets another opportunity to create another "Us vs. Them" moment.

People who support this piece of shit are supporting the internal destruction of their own country, and for what - so they can boost their pathetic fragile little egos? So they can get a tax cut? Is that all it takes to sell this country out?

Last edited by asahi; 08-06-2019 at 07:43 AM.
  #431  
Old 08-06-2019, 08:12 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
People who support this piece of shit are supporting the internal destruction of their own country, and for what - so they can boost their pathetic fragile little egos? So they can get a tax cut? Is that all it takes to sell this country out?
I think it's quite simple: he hates the same people that they do. They fear the US becoming browner, blacker, freer to love the same gender or switch gender, and where people can pray as they see fit. No matter how much they claim to love the Constitution, they hate the freedoms that it stands for. They want a strongmen who can tell the others, you aren't fucking welcome here.
  #432  
Old 08-06-2019, 08:23 AM
Walken After Midnight is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,772
Barack Obama:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama

[A]ll of us have to send a clarion call and behave with the values of tolerance and diversity that should be the hallmark of our democracy. We should soundly reject language coming out of the mouths of any of our leaders that feeds a climate of fear and hatred or normalizes racist sentiments; leaders who demonize those who don’t look like us, or suggest that other people, including immigrants, threaten our way of life, or refer to other people as sub-human, or imply that America belongs to just one certain type of people. Such language isn’t new – it’s been at the root of most human tragedy throughout history, here in America and around the world. It is at the root of slavery and Jim Crow, the Holocaust, the genocide in Rwanda and ethnic cleansing in the Balkans. It has no place in our politics and our public life. And it’s time for the overwhelming majority of Americans of goodwill, of every race and faith and political party, to say as much – clearly and unequivocally.
796k Likes for the tweet since yesterday.
  #433  
Old 08-06-2019, 09:33 AM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 26,855
I'm afraid that we're at the point that "saying as much", in any form, isn't going to be enough.
  #434  
Old 08-06-2019, 01:03 PM
SlackerInc is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,997
I love the Obama subtweet.

One theory I heard floated in an interesting interview of a Vox writer (herself young and black) by the conservative #NeverTrump writer and podcaster Jonah Goldberg, is that Trump himself is only mildly casually racist—but he condescendingly believes conservatives (a group he does not truly belong to) absolutely love virulent racism, so he throws them lots of bigoted red meat to boost their adulation of him.
  #435  
Old 08-06-2019, 01:26 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
Barack Obama:

796k Likes for the tweet since yesterday.
That's the real Barack Obama, not our poster by the same name?
  #436  
Old 08-06-2019, 01:29 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I love the Obama subtweet.

One theory I heard floated in an interesting interview of a Vox writer (herself young and black) by the conservative #NeverTrump writer and podcaster Jonah Goldberg, is that Trump himself is only mildly casually racist—but he condescendingly believes conservatives (a group he does not truly belong to) absolutely love virulent racism, so he throws them lots of bigoted red meat to boost their adulation of him.
A lot of us have debated whether this is Trump the impulsive narcissist or Trump the strategist. In truth, it's probably both.

Part of Trump is just pure impulse - no strategy, just years of Roy Cohn tutelage and vicious narcissism that fuels a viper-like reflexive attack on anyone who attacks his character. He doubles and triples down and refuses to apologize. If he's asked to stay away so communities have time to heal, he flies there to spit in their face. The closest he'll come to an apology is saying "It's a sad situation" or he'll simply drop the topic and move on to another outrage. This is impulse for sure.

But the impulse has become a strategy. It's too late for Trump to become a moderate; he's stuck with the extremists, and they're stuck with him. Bob Mueller has made it pretty clear that if he leaves office and a Democratic president takes over, he can be prosecuted for crimes, so these are the stakes in the upcoming election for Trump: it's not just reelection, but his survival that's on the line.

Polarization shouldn't work, but it can. It should repulse people, but it can also frighten them into thoughts and beliefs they might not have had before. Let's say a Black-, Hispanic-, or Arab-American man gets so fed up with white nationalism that he walks into a church and murders scores of worshipers - that's something that plays into Trump's and his white nationalist supporters' hands. It's what they want. They want an overreaction so that they in turn have more license to be even more outrageous. They want their opponents to react. It's no different than Al Qaida in Iraq when they went and blew up sacred mosque after sacred mosque. They beget Shi'ite death squads. I'm not predicting quite that, but I'm saying that they want conflict - conflict benefits the polarizing extremists.
  #437  
Old 08-06-2019, 02:33 PM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,999
nm
__________________
Law above fear, justice above law, mercy above justice, love above all.

Last edited by elucidator; 08-06-2019 at 02:33 PM.
  #438  
Old 08-06-2019, 04:15 PM
SlackerInc is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Polarization shouldn't work, but it can. It should repulse people, but it can also frighten them into thoughts and beliefs they might not have had before. Let's say a Black-, Hispanic-, or Arab-American man gets so fed up with white nationalism that he walks into a church and murders scores of worshipers - that's something that plays into Trump's and his white nationalist supporters' hands. It's what they want. They want an overreaction so that they in turn have more license to be even more outrageous. They want their opponents to react. It's no different than Al Qaida in Iraq when they went and blew up sacred mosque after sacred mosque. They beget Shi'ite death squads. I'm not predicting quite that, but I'm saying that they want conflict - conflict benefits the polarizing extremists.

Yeah, I’m really nervous about something like this happening.
  #439  
Old 08-06-2019, 05:29 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
...Polarization shouldn't work, but it can. It should repulse people, but it can also frighten them into thoughts and beliefs they might not have had before. Let's say a Black-, Hispanic-, or Arab-American man gets so fed up with white nationalism that he walks into a church and murders scores of worshipers - that's something that plays into Trump's and his white nationalist supporters' hands. It's what they want. They want an overreaction so that they in turn have more license to be even more outrageous. ...
There are theories that the inhumane treatment of refugees on the border is intended to provoke an incident, with at least one white victim (one of the guards/private contractors working in those facilities). Then Trump has his excuse to impose martial law on the border.

Same thing with your scenario of a man of color snapping and committing mass murder of whites--that gives Trump his excuse to finally do what he's been heading toward since Inauguration Day: tear up the Constitution. Close down the court system and appoint his own "courts." Imprison critics on the grounds that criticizing the President is sedition. Close down the New York Times and Washington Post and CNN and MSNBC. Impose controls over the Internet.

They've been edging closer as the months go by. They have their own people in place in many venues that will be critical--for instance, the FCC's Ajit Pai stands ready to close down every means of independent communication. US troops are already stationed on US soil, breaking centuries of precedent. Plenty of right-wing judges are ready to staff the new "justice" system.

They need a spark, though. They need that excuse.
  #440  
Old 08-06-2019, 05:49 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Let's say a Black-, Hispanic-, or Arab-American man gets so fed up with white nationalism that he walks into a church and murders scores of worshipers - that's something that plays into Trump's and his white nationalist supporters' hands. It's what they want. They want an overreaction so that they in turn have more license to be even more outrageous. They want their opponents to react. It's no different than Al Qaida in Iraq when they went and blew up sacred mosque after sacred mosque. They beget Shi'ite death squads. I'm not predicting quite that, but I'm saying that they want conflict - conflict benefits the polarizing extremists.
You bet your ass that's exactly what Trump wants. And it's what quite a few Republicans dream of. It is their only salvation at this point. I honestly would not be surprised if some Republican strategist somewhere does not have thoughts of making this a reality somehow.
  #441  
Old 08-06-2019, 06:14 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
You bet your ass that's exactly what Trump wants. And it's what quite a few Republicans dream of. It is their only salvation at this point. I honestly would not be surprised if some Republican strategist somewhere does not have thoughts of making this a reality somehow.
It's a possibility.

If they try it, they'd better be careful, though. There are a lot of people taking cell-phone video these days. Fakery might not be as easy as it was in the olden false-flag days....
  #442  
Old 08-07-2019, 06:52 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
There are theories that the inhumane treatment of refugees on the border is intended to provoke an incident, with at least one white victim (one of the guards/private contractors working in those facilities). Then Trump has his excuse to impose martial law on the border.

Same thing with your scenario of a man of color snapping and committing mass murder of whites--that gives Trump his excuse to finally do what he's been heading toward since Inauguration Day: tear up the Constitution. Close down the court system and appoint his own "courts." Imprison critics on the grounds that criticizing the President is sedition. Close down the New York Times and Washington Post and CNN and MSNBC. Impose controls over the Internet.

They've been edging closer as the months go by. They have their own people in place in many venues that will be critical--for instance, the FCC's Ajit Pai stands ready to close down every means of independent communication. US troops are already stationed on US soil, breaking centuries of precedent. Plenty of right-wing judges are ready to staff the new "justice" system.

They need a spark, though. They need that excuse.
I suppose they could directly to the fascist route, but what's more likely, IMO, is trying to use crisis to win legitimacy for their ideas. There's less resistance that way.

Right now the country is outraged and bitterly divided. There's some evidence showing that a fair number of independents are displeased with the direction that Trump and the GOP are taking with regard to immigration and other social issues. But if you can convince impressionable white voters that people of color have lost their minds, and that "They hate us because we own a house" (anyone remember that one?), then it's easier to legitimize extreme policies.

Some of Trump's behavior - maybe most of it - is just Trump being himself, but there's definitely a way to capitalize on utilize that behavior for political purposes. And if you're Stephen Miller, you're urging more of it from the president. The strategy, in short, is to take the very legitimate anger and outrage from people of color and to turn them into "domestic terrorists." Easier to demonize and de-legitimize them that way.

Last edited by asahi; 08-07-2019 at 06:55 PM.
  #443  
Old 08-07-2019, 07:12 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
It's a possibility.

If they try it, they'd better be careful, though. There are a lot of people taking cell-phone video these days. Fakery might not be as easy as it was in the olden false-flag days....
I forgot where I read it, but some of the strongest brands of authoritarianism (outside of North Korea) gives people the illusion that they have at least some influence and that the government is, in fact, doing what the people want them to do. That's why I find some of the more extreme scenarios a less likely; instead, they'll continue to give people the impression that federal government is hopelessly dysfunctional and that it operates best when it upholds strict constitutionalism, stays out of the way, and lets private companies and states deal with the undesirables.
  #444  
Old 08-07-2019, 07:20 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post

Some of Trump's behavior - maybe most of it - is just Trump being himself, but there's definitely a way to capitalize on utilize that behavior for political purposes. And if you're Stephen Miller, you're urging more of it from the president. The strategy, in short, is to take the very legitimate anger and outrage from people of color and to turn them into "domestic terrorists." Easier to demonize and de-legitimize them that way.
I'm becoming convinced that this is the exact playbook. Not from Trump - he is too stupid and too egotistical to even have a "playbook". But from the white nationalists in the background.

They'll be looking for a spark. Perhaps a fire. In a national building. That could be conveniently blamed on immigrants, or hispanics, or some kind of evil Democrat Party Scheme. After all, who is going to investigate? Trump's Dept. of Justice? Trump's FBI?

The only hope is that the Republicans are too damn stupid to pull it off, and outsource the job to some nitwit.
  #445  
Old 08-07-2019, 07:29 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
I forgot where I read it, but some of the strongest brands of authoritarianism (outside of North Korea) gives people the illusion that they have at least some influence and that the government is, in fact, doing what the people want them to do. That's why I find some of the more extreme scenarios a less likely; instead, they'll continue to give people the impression that federal government is hopelessly dysfunctional and that it operates best when it upholds strict constitutionalism, stays out of the way, and lets private companies and states deal with the undesirables.
I don't disagree with either this or your previous post. Certainly the big money boys will be urging the Trump Admin to keep things in the realm of precedent--no actual brownshirts, no actual goosestepping.

But Trump himself is going to become ever more desperate as it looks more and more likely that Russia's efforts will be for naught: if it's likely to be a landslide for the Democrat (and particularly if we are able to get paper ballots in the majority of states), Trump won't be able to skate by on the usual voter-suppression tactics. Having the hackers throw people off the rolls, closing polling places, social-media efforts to discourage voting by young and black and brown voters, etc.---they won't matter if there's a tidal wave of votes against Trump. And Trump's inevitable cry of 'rigged' won't be convincing.

At that point he's going to be listening to Crazy Steve/Stephen (Bannon and Miller), and listening hard. Gather, darkness.
  #446  
Old 08-07-2019, 07:29 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
I'm becoming convinced that this is the exact playbook. Not from Trump - he is too stupid and too egotistical to even have a "playbook". But from the white nationalists in the background.

They'll be looking for a spark. Perhaps a fire. In a national building. That could be conveniently blamed on immigrants, or hispanics, or some kind of evil Democrat Party Scheme. After all, who is going to investigate? Trump's Dept. of Justice? Trump's FBI?

The only hope is that the Republicans are too damn stupid to pull it off, and outsource the job to some nitwit.
This scenario has certainly occurred to me. Pin something on ANTIFA, but now it'll have to be something really big. Perp killed at the scene, a couple of his buddies (total innocents) brought in for show trial. Spin it out anyway you like, but Cohen was right. He will not go peacefully.
  #447  
Old 08-07-2019, 08:45 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 26,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
I don't disagree with either this or your previous post. Certainly the big money boys will be urging the Trump Admin to keep things in the realm of precedent--no actual brownshirts, no actual goosestepping.

But Trump himself is going to become ever more desperate as it looks more and more likely that Russia's efforts will be for naught: if it's likely to be a landslide for the Democrat (and particularly if we are able to get paper ballots in the majority of states), Trump won't be able to skate by on the usual voter-suppression tactics. Having the hackers throw people off the rolls, closing polling places, social-media efforts to discourage voting by young and black and brown voters, etc.---they won't matter if there's a tidal wave of votes against Trump. And Trump's inevitable cry of 'rigged' won't be convincing.

At that point he's going to be listening to Crazy Steve/Stephen (Bannon and Miller), and listening hard. Gather, darkness.
Dude, if there are paper ballots in only some states and it looks like Trump is going to lose, the GRU will just hack things where they can for his opponent in such a way as to lay blame at said opponent's feet. Trump will cry "rigged election!" and he'll be right. BAM! Crisis situation, fake election, Trump stays in power.

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 08-07-2019 at 08:46 PM.
  #448  
Old 08-09-2019, 06:15 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
Dude, if there are paper ballots in only some states and it looks like Trump is going to lose, the GRU will just hack things where they can for his opponent in such a way as to lay blame at said opponent's feet. Trump will cry "rigged election!" and he'll be right. BAM! Crisis situation, fake election, Trump stays in power.
Yeah, that's why the push to get paper ballots (or backup) everywhere is so crucial.

Trump can be counted on to cry 'rigged,' and the Russians can be counted on to try to hack. But we don't have to make it easy for them.

And the more widely this is discussed---the fact that Trump will try to stay in the WH no matter what the election results might be---the better. There are plenty of Americans who aren't either Trump fans or plugged-in leftists, who will react with distaste to the prospect of a president trying to make himself king.
  #449  
Old 08-09-2019, 07:13 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
Yeah, that's why the push to get paper ballots (or backup) everywhere is so crucial.

Trump can be counted on to cry 'rigged,' and the Russians can be counted on to try to hack. But we don't have to make it easy for them.

And the more widely this is discussed---the fact that Trump will try to stay in the WH no matter what the election results might be---the better. There are plenty of Americans who aren't either Trump fans or plugged-in leftists, who will react with distaste to the prospect of a president trying to make himself king.
Yeah, I don't understand why people would disagree with the notion that in order to have confidence in a secure election, there must be a paper trail. We have no evidence that there was any hacking that changed votes in 2016, but if they were successful in their hacking, would there be?

As concerned as I am about Putin or the Koch brothers choosing our next president, I'm just about as concerned that our next president may be chosen by a 12 year old who downloaded a script from the internet.

Of course, now that I think about it, a paper trail has a vulnerability, namely, paper's mortal enemy, fire. "We would sure like to look in to those suspicious election results, but unfortunately, there was this totally not suspicious fire."
  #450  
Old 08-09-2019, 07:21 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
Dude, if there are paper ballots in only some states and it looks like Trump is going to lose, the GRU will just hack things where they can for his opponent in such a way as to lay blame at said opponent's feet. Trump will cry "rigged election!" and he'll be right. BAM! Crisis situation, fake election, Trump stays in power.
If there are paper ballots, we will begin to see not just voter suppression, but voter intimidation - as in armed white nationalist thugs, perhaps including officers of the law showing up on behalf of white nationalists, warning blacks or latinos they'll be beaten and/or jailed for voting. Not hyperbole; where there's a history, there's the possibility - no, the likelihood - that it'll happen again. Especially now.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:21 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017