…you are being disingenuous.
I previously asked that I hoped you would do me the courtesy of engaging in good faith. Looks like you aren’t capable of doing something as simple as that.
You can give money to someone else without taking an active part in the planning of whatever that person is doing. Millions of Americans who contribute money to political parties do that every year. This isn’t a difficult concept. Stop pretending to be stupid.
Can we talk about Trump possibly cancelling the midterm elections? Or is that hysteria?
The states run the elections. He doesn’t have to pay any attention to it I suppose. The States certainly will.
I don’t think anyone is surprised by your inability to parse this very simple distinction.
I honestly feel that the distinctions you are drawing are difficult to define. You’ve stated that Trump funded and materially supported a genocide. And you’ve stated that Trump gave approval to genocide.
If somebody approached me and described a robbery they planned on carrying out but said they needed me to give approval to the robbery and to financially support setting up the robbery, I would acknowledge that I was involved in the planning of the robbery.
If you disagree, can you tell me what step you feel is necessary in order for it to be said that I was planning the robbery?
This really isn’t difficult. @Banquet_Bear is clearly talking about support for Netanyahu, and is referring to genocide of Palestinians, which isn’t a genocide @Banquet_Bear thinks Trump is either planning or currently committing.
Other posters who do think that Trump is committing or planning to commit genocide are not talking about Palestine, but an ethnic cleansing of the US. And frankly, looking in from the outside, claiming that ethnic cleansing isn’t in the works is becoming a less convincing position by the day.
…that would be because you are stupid.
You said “I was quoting a number of other posters who had said that Trump was planning on committing genocide or had already committed genocide.”
I’m telling you that I don’t think Trump is planning on committing genocide of the Palestinian people, nor is he currently committing a genocide of the Palestinian people.
I think that the plans that have been announced for Gaza amount to the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, but that’s an entirely different story. Genocide is something different. It has a legal definition (that I’ve provided), and what Trump & Co are doing doesn’t fit that definition. Trump couldn’t be prosecuted for genocide here. That’s the threshold.
All states have a legal duty to prevent and punish genocide. But a failure to do so doesn’t mean they are committing genocide…instead they are complicit.
I didn’t say that. I’ll let your words speak for themselves you fucking liar,
You might note that the words committing and genocide do not appear.
Ethnic cleansing is a subset of genocidal practices.
You appear to hold a different position on the matter.
…ethnic cleansing isn’t genocide.
I don’t know what you mean here.
It’s not up to the president whether we have elections or not.
Nope. You’re right.
State reps, govs, etc. will definitely make it more difficult for key state voters to feel safe voting in person, “cancel mail-in voting!!!”, which Trump and many other GOPers use anyway, possibly making VERY close state elections “frauds!”, followed by investigations, delaying the rightful Dem winners from taking their office.
Feds can’t cancel state elections, but they can put out the fear. All they need.
Just like they did in 2018, and 2020, and 2025!
Odd. Hitler didn’t invade Poland in 1933, but if memory serves, he definitely did invade Poland in 1939.
Are you trying to say that what hasn’t truly and totally happened yet cannot ever happen?
Because it would be an argument totally void of merit, reason, logic, or common sense.
I’m saying we’ve already seen Trump & co.’s best attempt at undoing the results of an election and it was a spectacular failure. I doubt that the Republican state officials that were completely unwilling to break the law for Trump six years ago are going to be willing to do it now, or that the judges who dismissed every single electoral challenge he put forth are going to change their minds, or that the tricks that didn’t work last time are suddenly going to work now, or that they’ve conceived of some genius new idea that nobody ever thought of before.
Which went absolutely nowhere in terms of refuting my argument.
Things change. Things take place that we aren’t aware of until the benefit of hindsight kicks in.
As I said, on this subject, you utterly fall the fuck apart.
It’s charming … sort of.
Eh. Maybe ‘tedious’ was an infinitely better word.
Yes. Things have changed. Trump is older, less mentally fit, and less popular, and he’s surrounded himself with a much less competent batch of yes-men and enablers.
There’s nothing to suggest he’s gotten better at electoral trickery.
Yep. 2025. When, what was it, four out of six states that went Dem? Glad they won the majority. Oh, wait…
Right now if your last name is Gomez, or anything similar, I doubt a vote even gets cast from a voter in that realm.
Hope I’m wrong, but this may be the least amount of votes cast at any midterm election.
Just like there was “nothing to suggest” the Alternate Slate of Electors scheme.
Until there was, at least.
Logic has utterly abandoned you at this point. I’d like to suggest a search party.
Which failed, because nobody went along with it.
What makes you think people are going to be willing to break the law for Trump now when they refused to before?