2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Duke Nukem said:
We seriously need a "Salty" rating if we're going to keep posting political hot takes. The normal ones just don't do it for me anymore.

View attachment 1716723


I think a lot of people wouldn't be happy with that outcome, and that's what makes it funny to me.


Because it would be hilarious to see the look on leftards' faces when they not only lose a Democrat presidency, but sperg out believing that mandatory electroshock therapy is indeed inevitable.

Like dude, they said Obama was going to "take our guns away" and the fucker's administration couldn't even run a functioning website for his pet project, the "Affordable" Care Act.
Click to expand...
I thought the ranting about Obama taking away guns was from people like Alex Jones. It never seemed like a realistic possibility, as you said.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Parthenos, Yamma Damma, Granola Grenadine and 5 others
Smarty Pants said:
Marie Antoinette never actually said that but that's not even the point.
Click to expand...
She did tell them to use confectioners flour after she found out they were out of bakers flour.
Goldman said:
>WE'RE GOING TO GET BIDEN IN OFFICE THEN HOLD HIM ACCOUNTABLE

If AZ flips legitimately, only PA is needed.
edit: nevermind, you were already saying this
Click to expand...
Your map has MN going to Trump. That's pretty close to the bottom of possibilities.

ETA: PA, AZ, and NV get the meme 269 tie.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: Parthenos, Tismguide, BananaRepublic of America and 8 others
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Parthenos, TerribleIdeas™, JohnDoe and 21 others
April Ryan said:
People don't seem to realize, unless the court is even more utterly fucked than we think, how easy a win Trump should get, at least in terms of Pennsylvania.

They ignored an order from a justice of the supreme court. You don't get to walk away from that. If there is one thing that no court anywhere in the world has ever liked its being ignored. If they do nothing about it then they destroy themselves.

It literally gives legal precedent to being allowed to ignore the supreme court. The 5 conservatives are going to straight up nope that shit, but it will likely bring at least Roberts and may-be even at least one of the other three on board as well as they will not want their own power diminished.

Pennsylvania is the only state Trump really needs to win in court, he will most likely get the others he needs through recounts and such.
Click to expand...
I agree with you entirely until you said the liberal judges would vote in favor of Trump's legal case. I agree Roberts is more likely to agree since the PA Elections Board flaunted the power of the Supreme Court directly, but the other 3 judges are bound to find some bullshit excuse about "Voter suppression" or "marginalization" to support PA. Still, there's a definite 5-4 vote and a likely but not exactly certain 6-3 vote in the case of PA.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Parthenos, TerribleIdeas™, JohnDoe and 6 others
  • Like
Reactions: Parthenos and EmuWarsVeteran
Trump breaks his silence
Screen Shot 2020-11-08 at 11.00.35 AM.png


Also, RIP Alex Trebek. Pancreatic cancer is a fucking cunt :(
 
  • Feels
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Rohan Davey, the fall of man, ADHD and 24 others
verissimus said:
No my real point is say what you mean. Recusal, with regard to the Supreme Court, is utterly meaningless, but that's the way these people are. There always always always a convenient excuse for them.
Click to expand...
The media is walking a tightrope. They -cannot- allow their viewers to glimpse into the truth.
HumanHive said:
Just remember SC is likely, at time of writing, to only deliver PA to Trump. Not certain, only likely. After this, at least two other states must flip by some means - AZ is looking kinda likely for Trump, so one more after that. But none of that is certain at all, just possible. GA for example could fear losing the Senate runoffs and cuck.

This is not over and I am not doomposting. This is reality and Trump has to pull off a royal flush one last time.
Click to expand...
Georgia AND Wisconsin both look like possible... maybe even probable flips going off what evidence we have. Georgia was tight as is, and Wisconsin's legislature is pissed. In fact... https://www.infowars.com/posts/wisc...lly-altered-under-elections-commission-order/

There were Two. Million. Absentee ballot requests. Trump only needs a swing of 22K.
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Parthenos, the fall of man, CrystalHead and 13 others
MrJokerRager said:
Is there even the possibility of Donald Trump crossing the Delaware and ordering the state GOPs of all those battleground states as the leader of the GOP to vote in faithless electors to give him the election. I guess this is the final nuclear option if everything fails as the voter fraud gets more blatant and goalposts keep moving.
Click to expand...

That's not the final nuclear option. The final nuclear option is the Insurrection Act: the contested states are unable/unwilling to enforce the law, therefor a declaration of martial law and the deployment of federal troops to preserve/restore order by force is necessary. Have the Marines secure the ballots and have the military do a colonoscopy-level audit and recount of each state that's not in compliance.

Remember, the difference between Big Brother and Baghdad Bob is who has the guns, and Trump is still CIC. I know this is optimistic as fuck, but hey, what would he have to lose at that point?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: Livecorpse, JohnDoe, secret watcher and 13 others
X Prime said:
Articulate them, if you would, and I would be interested in how many fall on the side of character foibles as opposed to substantive policy differences.

It is my experience that most fall on the former, which I find irrational since the main thing that should matter in a politician is policy.
Click to expand...
For the record, I voted for him, enthusiastically. I just always try to put myself in the shoes of someone with a different viewpoint than mine, and if you have different ideological roots, you can absolutely reach a different conclusion about Trump’s character and policy.

It goes without saying that if you end up favoring left leaning economic policy, then you’d oppose nearly everything he’s done outright. If you favor a global, interconnected world as opposed to protectionism it’s a similar story. You can argue all day about whether those positions themselves are rational, but we would do a lot better as a country if we had that discussion while respecting the fact that many people as smart or smarter than us with different backgrounds and perspectives ended up feeling the way they do. Like I said before, most policy disagreement is a question of values; even the ones that are a question of effectiveness are rooted in terms of what the government and society’s role should be.

From a more neutral standpoint, there are a few other things to point out about Trump in particular:

Many people on both the left and right have reservations about his character because it undeniably influences his policy; he’s a populist president, has an ego, and as a result has the tendency to let short term gains in visible popularity dictate his decisions. That, or let personal slights with individuals inform domestic or foreign policy posturing. It’s volatile, can backfire, and even if you like his style of diplomacy there’s no denying he could do it with a little more finesse. Same goes for his public statements; he’s a master at manipulating the media getting his message out there, but at times he doesn’t show enough care in how that message is crafted.

I’d be the first to argue that Trump’s reputation has more to do with an extremely hostile media apparatus than it does with his own flaws, but keep in mind that he knows that too and is willing to say inflammatory things knowing that the media will amplify the divisiveness. Policy is important, but perception is as well.

From a separation of powers standpoint, while he’s shown a lot of restraint with COVID and the riots, but if you were hoping for some scaling back of the power of the executive, Trump would have disappointed you as well. Financially he was off to a good start, but he’s signed a few budgets that a fiscal conservative would have had a heart attack over. Maybe you could argue he had to as a political necessity but like I said at the beginning, if that’s your issue of choice, then it’s perfectly rational to be pissed at him for enabling it.

Sorry if I’m ranting a bit, I just wanted to make sure I responded.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: the fall of man, Mikoyan MiG-29, Granola Grenadine and 14 others
Lets add some more on Wisconsin:


and uh...

www.politico.com

Supreme Court won't extend Wisconsin ballot deadline

The ruling was issued just as the Senate was preparing to vote to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the high court.
www.politico.com www.politico.com

The Wisconsin State Supreme Court is NOT pozzed.

Addendum: Holy Shit it gets better.

https://newstalk1130.iheart.com/fea...wfully-altered-thousands-of-absentee-ballots/ They told them to write it all down in red ink, to be clearer.
 
  • Informative
  • Winner
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Parthenos, AnitaSarsleezian, Every Crook and Nanny and 27 others
Krokodil Overdose said:
That's not the final nuclear option. The final nuclear option is the Insurrection Act: the contested states are unable/unwilling to enforce the law, therefor a declaration of martial law and the deployment of federal troops to preserve/restore order by force is necessary. Have the Marines secure the ballots and have the military do a colonoscopy-level audit and recount of each state that's not in compliance.

Remember, the difference between Big Brother and Baghdad Bob is who has the guns, and Trump is still CIC. I know this is optimistic as fuck, but hey, what would he have to lose at that point?
Click to expand...

Lol that's not an option, the military won't obey him.
 
  • Disagree
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: axfaxf, secret watcher, Tismguide and 9 others
Goldman said:
You mean that they tried to cheat so much so they can get away with enough of it to win by cheating anyway?
Click to expand...

Yes, because then they can claim the Trump administration invalidated millions of people's votes. That is that would be their selling point and too many people wouldn't read beyond that. Again, these people have an excuse for everything they do.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: Parthenos, JohnDoe, MarvinTheParanoidAndroid and 12 others
Pointless Pedant said:
I thought the ranting about Obama taking away guns was from people like Alex Jones. It never seemed like a realistic possibility, as you said.
Click to expand...
Oh believe me they do talk tough but their balloon deflates every time. It's almost as if they have these absurdly unworkable bills written up and stashed in the glove box just in case an opportunity rises.

It's mostly a tool through which to gain support from suburban Karens but it never materializes on a federal level. Not saying those types wouldn't want to it's just that it's literally impossible to catch 'em all.

Why do Australians oil their gardens? To keep their firearms from rusting.
 
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: Allakazam223, 640by480, MarvinTheParanoidAndroid and 4 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back