Donald Trump
Comments
-
The clue is in the title of the thread Dennis.dennisn said:Are you guys still going at this Trump thing? I guess I should give thanks that I still try to enjoy life and not get wrapped up in the boredom and idiocy of politics. My god people. Read a good book, go for a ride, work on your bike, learn a new skill like wheelbuilding or playing a musical instrument. Anything other than this lame posting.
I think you need to click on one that is called, "Musical Instruments" or "Wheel building" - that way you won't be bored. People get quite excitable over spoke tension.0 -
Yes, we should find something productive to do like posting comments on an internet forum complaining about people commenting on an internet forum.dennisn said:Are you guys still going at this Trump thing? I guess I should give thanks that I still try to enjoy life and not get wrapped up in the boredom and idiocy of politics. My god people. Read a good book, go for a ride, work on your bike, learn a new skill like wheelbuilding or playing a musical instrument. Anything other than this lame posting.
0 -
Amusing that he is now saying Pfizer held back their vaccine announcement until after the election. I wouldn't be surprised if they did but considering his Tweet pretty much implied he would have taken credit for it despite having nothing to do with it that was probably a wise move. Plus it should tell him how he is viewed that a huge American business may have wanted to avoid doing something that could have saved his Presidency.
1 -
Didn't Pfizer respond to a tweet from Trump or Pence claiming the vaccine was developed as part of a federal government funded programme saying they had not been part of any government programme and had taken no government money in developing the vaccine, so the government couldn't claim any credit in having helped develop the vaccine.Pross said:Amusing that he is now saying Pfizer held back their vaccine announcement until after the election. I wouldn't be surprised if they did but considering his Tweet pretty much implied he would have taken credit for it despite having nothing to do with it that was probably a wise move. Plus it should tell him how he is viewed that a huge American business may have wanted to avoid doing something that could have saved his Presidency.
0 -
The Republican secretary of state in Georgia has come out quite strongly in support of the integrity of the election there, I think it's a mistake to assume that because the state legislature is Republican that Trump has control.kingstongraham said:
This will be why Trump still has odds. He will try to wield power while he has it, even though he lost. He controls the justice dept, the legislature in Michigan and Pennsylvania and possibly the courts.
Off the BBC:Georgia's Republican secretary of state, who is facing calls to resign from the state's two Republican senators, is out with a new statement hitting back at their claims that he mishandled the election.
Brad Raffensperger, whose office oversees Georgia's election, said he would not quit and blamed his party’s lawmakers - David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler - for their own predicament.
“The voters of Georgia hired me, and the voters will be the one to fire me,” he wrote.
He called election day a “resounding success” and said that he understands the senators are “irritated” to have to go to a runoff race after not winning a large enough majority of the vote.
Raffensperger concludes his statement saying: “As a Republican, I am concerned about Republicans keeping the US Senate. I recommend that Senators Loeffler and Perdue start focusing on that”.
In Pennsylvania they are looking to get late arriving ballots excluded, but these look not to have been decisive anyway so would make no difference (apparently, the courts are not likely to look at it if the number of votes in question is significantly less than the winning margin).
Trump would need to overturn the result in several states to win - it looks like the end margin will be 306 for Biden - so it seems very unlikely.0 -
It is unlikely, and requires massive norms to be ignored, but he'll still try. Anyone who thinks it's impossible hasn't paid attention.bobmcstuff said:
The Republican secretary of state in Georgia has come out quite strongly in support of the integrity of the election there, I think it's a mistake to assume that because the state legislature is Republican that Trump has control.kingstongraham said:
This will be why Trump still has odds. He will try to wield power while he has it, even though he lost. He controls the justice dept, the legislature in Michigan and Pennsylvania and possibly the courts.
Off the BBC:Georgia's Republican secretary of state, who is facing calls to resign from the state's two Republican senators, is out with a new statement hitting back at their claims that he mishandled the election.
Brad Raffensperger, whose office oversees Georgia's election, said he would not quit and blamed his party’s lawmakers - David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler - for their own predicament.
“The voters of Georgia hired me, and the voters will be the one to fire me,” he wrote.
He called election day a “resounding success” and said that he understands the senators are “irritated” to have to go to a runoff race after not winning a large enough majority of the vote.
Raffensperger concludes his statement saying: “As a Republican, I am concerned about Republicans keeping the US Senate. I recommend that Senators Loeffler and Perdue start focusing on that”.
In Pennsylvania they are looking to get late arriving ballots excluded, but these look not to have been decisive anyway so would make no difference (apparently, the courts are not likely to look at it if the number of votes in question is significantly less than the winning margin).
Trump would need to overturn the result in several states to win - it looks like the end margin will be 306 for Biden - so it seems very unlikely.0 -
0 -
I have been paying attention... I am suggesting that because he would need to overturn the results in several states, it is unlikely. Possible, sure. And guaranteed that he will try.kingstongraham said:
It is unlikely, and requires massive norms to be ignored, but he'll still try. Anyone who thinks it's impossible hasn't paid attention.bobmcstuff said:
The Republican secretary of state in Georgia has come out quite strongly in support of the integrity of the election there, I think it's a mistake to assume that because the state legislature is Republican that Trump has control.kingstongraham said:
This will be why Trump still has odds. He will try to wield power while he has it, even though he lost. He controls the justice dept, the legislature in Michigan and Pennsylvania and possibly the courts.
Off the BBC:Georgia's Republican secretary of state, who is facing calls to resign from the state's two Republican senators, is out with a new statement hitting back at their claims that he mishandled the election.
Brad Raffensperger, whose office oversees Georgia's election, said he would not quit and blamed his party’s lawmakers - David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler - for their own predicament.
“The voters of Georgia hired me, and the voters will be the one to fire me,” he wrote.
He called election day a “resounding success” and said that he understands the senators are “irritated” to have to go to a runoff race after not winning a large enough majority of the vote.
Raffensperger concludes his statement saying: “As a Republican, I am concerned about Republicans keeping the US Senate. I recommend that Senators Loeffler and Perdue start focusing on that”.
In Pennsylvania they are looking to get late arriving ballots excluded, but these look not to have been decisive anyway so would make no difference (apparently, the courts are not likely to look at it if the number of votes in question is significantly less than the winning margin).
Trump would need to overturn the result in several states to win - it looks like the end margin will be 306 for Biden - so it seems very unlikely.
I think the lawsuits are a diversion anyway, so he can keep talking about a stolen election for the next 4 years. Apparently he is already talking about a 2024 bid.0 -
Is there really any possibility of the Republicans choosing him as their candidate again? Would he run as an independent if not? I could imagine that playing to his ego and his desire to be seen to be taking on the "elite" but I'm not sure he could take the hammering he would get without Party support. Besides, by then he'll hopefully be tucked up in a nice Federal institution or at least have a record that prevents him standing.0
-
No idea. From the sounds of it, it is likely that he is going to go away and start his own TV channel, where he will presumably spend the next 4 years flaming QAnon conspiracy theories, so i guess it depends how that goes.0
-
Two trains of thought here.Pross said:Is there really any possibility of the Republicans choosing him as their candidate again? Would he run as an independent if not? I could imagine that playing to his ego and his desire to be seen to be taking on the "elite" but I'm not sure he could take the hammering he would get without Party support. Besides, by then he'll hopefully be tucked up in a nice Federal institution or at least have a record that prevents him standing.
Republicans could choose trump to run again knowing his popularity makes the odds of a win greater.
But then you have the risk of alienating a large portion of voters.
Conversely they may choose to distance themselves from him if these court cases fall though which appears likely.
He could easily run as an independent, it would suit his narrative as he could turn on both sides of the house citing corruption etc and how he would "drain the Swamp" as he keeps saying. Again he has a large support base to call on.0 -
It would be hard to achieve something as an independent President that has alienated both Parties but then he'd just spend another 4 years doing nothing and blaming the "Washington elite" for stopping him. He seems to like playing the victim and his base support lap it up too.step83 said:
Two trains of thought here.Pross said:Is there really any possibility of the Republicans choosing him as their candidate again? Would he run as an independent if not? I could imagine that playing to his ego and his desire to be seen to be taking on the "elite" but I'm not sure he could take the hammering he would get without Party support. Besides, by then he'll hopefully be tucked up in a nice Federal institution or at least have a record that prevents him standing.
Republicans could choose trump to run again knowing his popularity makes the odds of a win greater.
But then you have the risk of alienating a large portion of voters.
Conversely they may choose to distance themselves from him if these court cases fall though which appears likely.
He could easily run as an independent, it would suit his narrative as he could turn on both sides of the house citing corruption etc and how he would "drain the Swamp" as he keeps saying. Again he has a large support base to call on.0 -
Republicans (or Mitch McConnell at least) seem to be doubling down on the Trump approach. At the very least they seem committed to backing disinformation, fake news candidates in future.0
-
The Republicans need to consider that if they don't back him, and Trump runs as an independent, they will end up splitting the vote and thus the Democrats get in again. So their decision is going to be which option they would preferPross said:Is there really any possibility of the Republicans choosing him as their candidate again? Would he run as an independent if not? I could imagine that playing to his ego and his desire to be seen to be taking on the "elite" but I'm not sure he could take the hammering he would get without Party support. Besides, by then he'll hopefully be tucked up in a nice Federal institution or at least have a record that prevents him standing.
0 -
Electorate arguably doesn't really punish them for it, so why not double down?First.Aspect said:Republicans (or Mitch McConnell at least) seem to be doubling down on the Trump approach. At the very least they seem committed to backing disinformation, fake news candidates in future.
0 -
-
It is working at the moment. Not sure if in 4-8 years time the younger voters will show this to be short sighted though. These are a generation of people who grew up with the internet, unlike the middle aged white working class moron base they currently have.rick_chasey said:
Electorate arguably doesn't really punish them for it, so why not double down?First.Aspect said:Republicans (or Mitch McConnell at least) seem to be doubling down on the Trump approach. At the very least they seem committed to backing disinformation, fake news candidates in future.
0 -
I admire your optimism. Conversely they're brought up in a hyper partisan world where facts are not rooted in truth but are weapons so why would they know any different but to double down?First.Aspect said:
It is working at the moment. Not sure if in 4-8 years time the younger voters will show this to be short sighted though. These are a generation of people who grew up with the internet, unlike the middle aged white working class moron base they currently have.rick_chasey said:
Electorate arguably doesn't really punish them for it, so why not double down?First.Aspect said:Republicans (or Mitch McConnell at least) seem to be doubling down on the Trump approach. At the very least they seem committed to backing disinformation, fake news candidates in future.
0 -
If he ran as an independent, that could be really bad for the Republicans as he would take some of their vote - given how tight it was this time round in some places it wouldn't take much.step83 said:
Two trains of thought here.Pross said:Is there really any possibility of the Republicans choosing him as their candidate again? Would he run as an independent if not? I could imagine that playing to his ego and his desire to be seen to be taking on the "elite" but I'm not sure he could take the hammering he would get without Party support. Besides, by then he'll hopefully be tucked up in a nice Federal institution or at least have a record that prevents him standing.
Republicans could choose trump to run again knowing his popularity makes the odds of a win greater.
But then you have the risk of alienating a large portion of voters.
Conversely they may choose to distance themselves from him if these court cases fall though which appears likely.
He could easily run as an independent, it would suit his narrative as he could turn on both sides of the house citing corruption etc and how he would "drain the Swamp" as he keeps saying. Again he has a large support base to call on.
Jorgensen (the libertarian) has made some difference in this election - Georgia, for example, Biden leads by 12.3k and Jorgensen picked up 60k votes:
Pennsylvania, Biden margin 45k, Jorgensen picked up 78k nearly. Similar elsewhere.
Enough to have affected the race, possibly, depending on which side she took votes from most...0 -
He certainly has more Republican support now than he did we he begain in the 2016 election, me for one.Pross said:Is there really any possibility of the Republicans choosing him as their candidate again? Would he run as an independent if not? I could imagine that playing to his ego and his desire to be seen to be taking on the "elite" but I'm not sure he could take the hammering he would get without Party support. Besides, by then he'll hopefully be tucked up in a nice Federal institution or at least have a record that prevents him standing.
0 -
Yes but make believe Texans don't get a say as far as I'm aware.0
-
Yes, but you are 73 we are told, which is kind of my point.swjohnsey said:
He certainly has more Republican support now than he did we he begain in the 2016 election, me for one.Pross said:Is there really any possibility of the Republicans choosing him as their candidate again? Would he run as an independent if not? I could imagine that playing to his ego and his desire to be seen to be taking on the "elite" but I'm not sure he could take the hammering he would get without Party support. Besides, by then he'll hopefully be tucked up in a nice Federal institution or at least have a record that prevents him standing.
I'm in my late 40's. Some people I work with are mid-late 20's. I already feel like a fossil and I am already surprised by how much more of a chit they give about the environment, equality, etc. I don't see how that agenda can be reconciled with the "screw the planet, save jobs in the coal industry" type of policies that are clinging on at the moment.
I am not saying it will be, but could this be more of a last hurrah?
It could also be that I have spent most of my time in North America dealing with people from the cities and from the coasts. And from Canada.
0 -
No doubt younger folks tend to be more liberal. It is always easy to be generous with other folk's money. The cool part is that the 20 something will be 40 somethings in 20 years and more conservative. It is also true that folks in the cities are very different from country folks and this hold for the U.K. and Canada in my experience.0
-
I don't think they will stop believing in climate change though.0
-
True! I think some of them still believe in Santa Claus.bobmcstuff said:I don't think they will stop believing in climate change though.
0 -
You can't even read. Texas and Texans get a say, internet trolls pretending to be from Texas don't get a say not even when they post in cliche ridden local dialect. Do y'all understand the point now? If not I'll simplify it. You aren't some Texan who stumbled on this forum whilst looking for advice on a Brompton. I'd be amazed if anyone has ever believed that although there's always a chance someone will believe anything if it appears to support their own point of view.swjohnsey said:
Texas does get a say. Texas controls 14% of electoral votes. They all went for Trump.Pross said:Yes but make believe Texans don't get a say as far as I'm aware.
1 -
Where's the eye roll emoji on here when you need it?swjohnsey said:
True! I think some of them still believe in Santa Claus.bobmcstuff said:I don't think they will stop believing in climate change though.
0 -
Presumably Trump could enter the Republican primary in 2023 just like he did in 2015 and go from there. His problem is staying relevant without access to the vast machinery of the government to push his agenda and as they say a week is a long time in politics. Assuming that Biden's victory is ratified and he gets sworn in on January 20th, how much are people going to still be talking about Trump in 6, 12 or 18 months time. The news agenda is very fast moving and without the guaranteed publicity of the Presidency (except maybe his friends on Fox News) he'll be left somewhat shouting into the void. Also the problem for the Republican party is that if they back him in 2024 and he wins he can only serve 1 more term so they'd be looking for yet another post Trump candidate for 2028 and will others with Presidential ambitions be happy to put those ambitions on hold for potentially 8 more years.Pross said:Is there really any possibility of the Republicans choosing him as their candidate again? Would he run as an independent if not? I could imagine that playing to his ego and his desire to be seen to be taking on the "elite" but I'm not sure he could take the hammering he would get without Party support. Besides, by then he'll hopefully be tucked up in a nice Federal institution or at least have a record that prevents him standing.
'Hello to Jason Isaacs'0 -
This is very true.swjohnsey said:No doubt younger folks tend to be more liberal. It is always easy to be generous with other folk's money. The cool part is that the 20 something will be 40 somethings in 20 years and more conservative. It is also true that folks in the cities are very different from country folks and this hold for the U.K. and Canada in my experience.
We do though tend to refine our beliefs as we get older, rather than wholesale revise them. The younger generation has lived with climate change all their lives, have always had the internet and have only ever known globalisation.
Whereas I can remember being told in the late 70's that we were headed for an ice age, and the greatest existential threats to humanity were the hole in the ozone layer and aids.
Times change.0
