US Joe Biden News Megathread - The Other Biden Derangement Syndrome Thread (with a side order of Fauci Derangement Syndrome)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Let's pretend for one moment that he does die before the election, just for the funsies. What happens then? Will the nomination revert to option number 2, aka Bernie Sanders? Or will his running mate automatically replace him just the way Vice-President is supposted to step in after the Big Man in the White House chokes on a piece of matzo? Does he even have a running mate yet?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Billy Beer, Splinters RCVD, GenderCop and 22 others
Click to expand...
Creepy Pig Man said:
Somehow I don't think muting Trump is going to work out the way they planned. It's going to give him free reign to slam Biden over whatever he wants without Joe being able to even squeak out a denial. By the time it's Biden's turn again he'll probably be so flustered he'll just start spilling spaghetti all over the damn place.

Also, Trump is very expressive with his body-language and tends to project confidence whereas Joe couldn't even look at him for most of the first debate.
Click to expand...
If I were Trump, I’d just let Biden ruin himself in this debate by not only letting him have fully uninterrupted time to speak, but even be extra courteous by letting him speak more. There’s a reason Biden’s team has been calling lids on everything. Besides bringing up the Hunter Biden fiasco, his biggest weakness is being forced to speak without the aid of a teleprompter and a speech writer. Biden can’t improvise on the spot like Trump can. Also, if Biden refuses to talk about his foreign policy, Trump should bring up Joe’s tax plan.
 
  • Agree
  • Optimistic
  • DRINK!
Reactions: EmuWarsVeteran, ufukiniggas, legalkochi and 9 others
Sweet and Savoury said:
I'm not a Americunt so let me ask a question.

If ACB gets in next week is there time to revisit the PA SCotUS 4/4 split? It's pretty damning to allow votes after the fact but without a post mark?

Might as well call PA for Biden now and not waste time counting the truckloads of unmarked ballots that will show up.
Click to expand...
they can reverse their decision or have another lawsuit offer justification to make the previous decision moot. Brown V Board did that to Plessy v ferguson, former ruling segregation as unconstitutional made the latter legal upholding of segregation pointless.

I have no idea how they get to that point though. I'm guessing someone is going to look at the truckloads of ballots coming in and realize the ballot count is way higher than registered voters in the district, somebody will sue somebody and it will go to court to see if they need to redo the election with strict rules.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, Effluvium, Exterminatus and 3 others
MrJokerRager said:
Trump should dump the debate and go on Joe Rogan seriously.

This is beyond rigged, nobody will have their minds changed with a week to go and any idiot undecideds left, well good luck under a Biden administration when their areas will go to shit.
Click to expand...

If he wasn't on Spotify this could happen. The trannies working there would lose their shit and find a way to stop it. He said he's still in charge of the podcast but recent events have shown that's 100% bullshit.
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: EmuWarsVeteran, BONE_Buddy, Marchesa of the Vast and 17 others
murdered meat bag said:
they can reverse their decision or have another lawsuit offer justification to make the previous decision moot. Brown V Board did that to Plessy v ferguson, former ruling segregation as unconstitutional made the latter legal upholding of segregation pointless.

I have no idea how they get to that point though. I'm guessing someone is going to look at the truckloads of ballots coming in and realize the ballot count is way higher than registered voters in the district, somebody will sue somebody and it will go to court to see if they need to redo the election with strict rules.
Click to expand...
I'd be suspicious if any district reports a 100%+ voter turnout rate.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: legalkochi, Hamberlard Raid, 1Tonka_Truck and 14 others
CrippleThreat said:
Also keeps Orange Man from segueing into the laptop to provoke Joe because the Bidens have had a salacious foreign policy worth pressing on.

This is their last stand, and there is no escape.
Click to expand...

Like that will stop Orange man. 'Speaking of Chinese flu, they were bribing Joe and his son.'
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Hamberlard Raid, Creepy Pig Man, Marchesa of the Vast and 5 others
AnotherPleb said:
Whitey bad and ree muh 200.000 dead 2.0. Did you forget the first debate?
Click to expand...
Every time he keeps trying to use that folksy rhetorical flourish of "How many more empty seats will there have to be at the dinner table," I keep wondering if he's asking that because he's noticed such a massive vacancy at the old folk's home where he's been shipped off to, because that statement applies to practically no one else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marchesa of the Vast, spiritofamermaid, Iwasamwillbe and 5 others
soy_king said:
Every time he keeps trying to use that folksy rhetorical flourish of "How many more empty seats will there have to be at the dinner table," I keep wondering if he's asking that because he's noticed such a massive vacancy at the old folk's home where he's been shipped off to, because that statement applies to practically no one else.
Click to expand...
To be fair, after Hunter's computer was leaked it's extremely likely Joe won't have any sons at his table this year.
 
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Hamberlard Raid, Parthenos, BONE_Buddy and 16 others
murdered meat bag said:
they can reverse their decision or have another lawsuit offer justification to make the previous decision moot. Brown V Board did that to Plessy v ferguson, former ruling segregation as unconstitutional made the latter legal upholding of segregation pointless.

I have no idea how they get to that point though. I'm guessing someone is going to look at the truckloads of ballots coming in and realize the ballot count is way higher than registered voters in the district, somebody will sue somebody and it will go to court to see if they need to redo the election with strict rules.
Click to expand...
The Supreme Court didn't write any positions, they just voted yes or no. The issue could be brought up in front of them again where they're forced to hear testimony, write opinions, etc. But that shit takes a long time.
 
Secret Asshole said:
The Supreme Court didn't write any positions, they just voted yes or no. The issue could be brought up in front of them again where they're forced to hear testimony, write opinions, etc. But that shit takes a long time.
Click to expand...

I expect a repeat of 2000 to happen with an emergency injunction or whatever to rush it to the SCOTUS. I don't think PA will be the only one, either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1Tonka_Truck, BONE_Buddy, REGENDarySumanai and 6 others
Secret Asshole said:
The Supreme Court didn't write any positions, they just voted yes or no. The issue could be brought up in front of them again where they're forced to hear testimony, write opinions, etc. But that shit takes a long time.
Click to expand...
Doesn't a 4-4 decision just kick it back to the lower court (in this case the Pennsylvania Supreme Court) that made it in the first place since it would not set a precedent? If so, couldn't Pennsylvanian Republican appeal again once Barrett gets confirmed on the 26th and hope they come to a decision before November 3rd that strikes down the "count ballots after three days" requirement? I don't like the idea of having to wait weeks just for the Supreme Court to decide if voter fraud occurred in Pennsylvania or not, even if Barrett rules in favor of Trump.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: spiritofamermaid and heathercho
Someone Awful said:
Doesn't a 4-4 decision just kick it back to the lower court (in this case the Pennsylvania Supreme Court) that made it in the first place since it would not set a precedent? If so, couldn't Pennsylvanian Republican appeal again once Barrett gets confirmed on the 26th and hope they come to a decision before November 3rd that strikes down the "count ballots after three days" requirement? I don't like the idea of having to wait weeks just for the Supreme Court to decide if voter fraud occurred in Pennsylvania or not, even if Barrett rules in favor of Trump.
Click to expand...

Yes, and it's why ACB will almost definitely be in place next week, just in time for another appeal to the SCOTUS, this time hopefully resulting in a 5/4 decision stopping this blatant fuckery.
 
  • Like
  • Optimistic
Reactions: legalkochi, Parthenos, 1Tonka_Truck and 12 others
HTTP Error 404 said:
Yes, and it's why ACB will almost definitely be in place next week, just in time for another appeal to the SCOTUS, this time hopefully resulting in a 5/4 decision stopping this blatant fuckery.
Click to expand...
Thought so. I was hoping to put out my prediction map sometimes next week, but it looks like I'll have to wait until right before Election Day. I can wait, but as I have said before, each day will only become more anxious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EmuWarsVeteran
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back