What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

Started by FunkMonk, November 08, 2016, 11:02:57 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Josquius

Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on November 22, 2022, 11:19:34 AMOddly enough some prominent qAnon forums and Telegram channels apparently are also mad that he is running again because they agree with the analysis that it confirms he did not win in 2020, and confirms that he is not, actually, President right now (most Q believers still believe Trump is secretly the real President still and is only allowing Biden to pretend to be the President for his eventual unleashing of "the storm" to expose all the pedophiles and adrenochrome harvesters in government."

I like and am surprised by this out of character consistency from them.
██████
██████
██████

Admiral Yi

Supreme Court has ruled Donald must provide tax returns to Congress.

Gups

Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 22, 2022, 04:56:09 PMSupreme Court has ruled Donald must provide tax returns to Congress.

Does this mean they are made public?

Admiral Yi

Quote from: Gups on November 23, 2022, 03:53:07 AMDoes this mean they are made public?

I think not, but they'll undoubtedly be leaked.

alfred russel

Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 19, 2022, 08:46:52 PM
Quote from: grumbler on November 19, 2022, 04:30:58 PMBTW, as Jimmy Kimmel pointed out, Trump running again is a concession that he lost in 2020.  If, as he claims, he won in 2020, then he has completed two terms and is ineligible to run in 2024.

Th fatal flaw in that line of reasoning is that it assumes Trump has any respect for the Constitution, or any rules that might constrain him.

There's just nothing to be gained by descending into the funhouse mirror world of Trump's mind.

The fatal flaw in that line of reasoning is that it is really dumb. Trump isn't president. If we find millions of Trump ballots behind the dumpsters of a bunch of states that never got counted and would have made Trump president, that doesn't mean Trump has been president the last two years. It means the election was stolen from him and Biden became president.

By the same token if someone proves that Nixon really defeated Kennedy in 1960 had votes been legitimately counted, that doesn't mean we revise textbooks to show that Nixon was the president from 1961-1965.
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

There's a fine line between salvation and drinking poison in the jungle.

I'm embarrassed. I've been making the mistake of associating with you. It won't happen again. :)
-garbon, February 23, 2014

Valmy

Quote from: alfred russel on November 23, 2022, 08:14:45 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 19, 2022, 08:46:52 PM
Quote from: grumbler on November 19, 2022, 04:30:58 PMBTW, as Jimmy Kimmel pointed out, Trump running again is a concession that he lost in 2020.  If, as he claims, he won in 2020, then he has completed two terms and is ineligible to run in 2024.

Th fatal flaw in that line of reasoning is that it assumes Trump has any respect for the Constitution, or any rules that might constrain him.

There's just nothing to be gained by descending into the funhouse mirror world of Trump's mind.

The fatal flaw in that line of reasoning is that it is really dumb. Trump isn't president. If we find millions of Trump ballots behind the dumpsters of a bunch of states that never got counted and would have made Trump president, that doesn't mean Trump has been president the last two years. It means the election was stolen from him and Biden became president.

By the same token if someone proves that Nixon really defeated Kennedy in 1960 had votes been legitimately counted, that doesn't mean we revise textbooks to show that Nixon was the president from 1961-1965.

Bah. Kennedy beat Nixon in Texas and we would never illegitimately count votes in favor of LBJ. They always leave that part out when talking about Chicago. Doesn't matter how many dead people voted.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

OttoVonBismarck

Yeah, for some reason that seems to be very often left out of the discussion about the 1960 election. It was a razor thin election by popular vote standards, but Kennedy won the electoral vote 303-219 and it was 269 to win in that year. Even if you took Illinois away, he is still President by 7 votes.

Now 1960 was notable in just how close so many States were: Kennedy won 4 states by less than a 1% margin (IL 0.19%, MO 0.52%, NM 0.74%, NJ 0.8%), and he also won 12 States by less than 50,000 vote margins (TX 46k, WV 45k, AR 30k, NJ 22k, Mn 22k, MO 9k, SC 9k, IL 8k, DE 3k, NV 2k, NM 2k, Hawai 115.)

Obviously a very slight shift in voting patterns and Nixon would have won comfortably--but despite the persistent claims and decent evidence of voting irregularities in Illinois, there has never been any sort of proven voting irregularity in any of the States in question or even well sourced allegations in most of them outside of IL.

Syt

I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.
—Stephen Jay Gould

Proud owner of 42 Zoupa Points.

The Minsky Moment

Caro discussed at some length and detail about the methods LBJ used to pull votes out of some of the Texas counties.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

Berkut

"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

Sheilbh

Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 23, 2022, 03:31:41 PMCaro discussed at some length and detail about the methods LBJ used to pull votes out of some of the Texas counties.
Yeah. I feel like I've heard historians talk about this and say the suspicions about Illinois are possibly a little overblown, but Texas deserves more focus.
Let's bomb Russia!

The Minsky Moment

Just took a look at Trump's "Truth Social" account.  It's full of QAnon retweets.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

OttoVonBismarck

The problem with a lot of the 1960 claims is to the best data we've been able to get it looked like a lot of stuff that was going on at some low level everywhere at that time, and there isn't any super strong evidence it massively benefited JFK vs Nixon.

Also remember at least some of this was litigated at the time and courts didn't find the level of evidence produced persuasive, obviously Nixon was against litigating it too far so it is hard to say what would have happened had he been more aggressively behind the legal efforts.

There has also been a lot of "mythmaking" involved too, like the famous claim that in some parts of the Rio Grande valley in Texas more votes were cast than registered voters--but record keeping of voters wasn't the same back then. The only people on the voter rolls were people who paid poll taxes, but large swathes of the population were exempt from poll taxes, and were eligible to vote, but weren't on the rolls.

It's worth noting LBJ was an educator of Mexican children and had ties to that community, so it is highly likely JFK was going to get the lion's share of the Rio Grande valley votes regardless.

Again, because it was decided for political reasons not to push this as far as possible in court (Nixon's concern wasn't the health of our republic so much as his belief he would not "win" in court, and pushing it too far would brand him a permanent "sore loser" with no hope for a political comeback), a lot of this will never be known. There have been analyses of data done in the 80s, but with some of this stuff it becomes unknowable if you didn't do an investigation, rigorously, right then and there because records get lost, or "lost", and etc.

PJL

That Trump tweet makes more sense than usual. I'd probably agree with about 25-30% of what it said, but for completely differenrt reasons than what Trump meant.

The Minsky Moment

There were legal proceedings in the 1948 Senate race and thus quite extensive evidence of corruption was gathered in Duval and Jim Wells counties, including fabrication of votes of people on the rolls but who were not physically present in the county on election day and who swore affidavits that they didn't cast votes.  There were no similar proceedings in 1960 and thus not the same level of proof, but the Parr machine was still in charge of the counties  (thanks in part to LBJ's protection).
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson