2024 Election Discussion General

[aurum]

15 minutes ago, Buck Edwards said:

I do not follow what you're saying. 

Trump is and never be allowed to do anything unconstitutional. 

I hope that’s the case. And you may be right.

The issue is that what is or isn’t “unconstitutional” is decided by courts. And the Right-wing has been packing courts in their favor.

[Buck Edwards]

Just now, aurum said:

I hope that’s the case. And you may be right.

The issue is that what is or isn’t “unconstitutional” is decided by courts. And the Right-wing has been packing courts in their favor.

Well let's hope that democracy wins and doesn't get stripped off the constitution. 

 

[ryandesreu]

12 hours ago, Joshe said:

What do people make of North Korea joining forces with Russia at this time? I wonder if it is a tactic to influence the election. Many people think dictators are afraid of Trump and that he can end wars with a phone call.

The idea that he could "end wars with a phone call" remains largely unproven since the complexities of global conflicts typically prevent such instant resolutions.

[ryandesreu]

11 hours ago, LoseYourvelf said:

It's scary this is the type of programming you sit and eat up no issues, enough to come to that type of conclusion

Okay, now what are the inaccuracies or missed points in the video?

[Husseinisdoingfine]

Leo's recent statement and prediction: 2024 Election Prediction

Quote

First, regardless of what I say here, please go vote.

Now, on to the prediction...

The race is razor tight, so any prediction is foolish, but I am sensing a Trump victory.

Why?

Because I just see way too much false equivocating, excuse-making, complacency, Stage Orange mania, and contempt for the mainstream. By and large people are not taking the danger of a second Trump administration seriously. They rationalize it as not so bad, not worse than the first Trump term, etc. People are acting like spoiled juveniles, and they are proud of themselves for it. This does not bode well. This is a clear marker of collective immaturity and dysfunction.

The American public is behaving like a child playing with a live hand-grenade. That's the mood I'm seeing. It doesn't feel right. The whole mood is wrong. People have lost their minds with internet brain-rot political ideology. This election should not even be close. That it is so close is an indictment of America.

Three groups here need to be especially called out:

1) The corporate class, billionaires, capitalist elites, Tech Bros:

The corporate billionaire class is cynically aligning with power and fascism, as the industrialists aligned with the Nazi party in Nazi Germany, because they think it will help them get favors for their business interests. This is pure capitalist corruption. Pure megalomaniac neoliberal delusion, greed, and cynicism. These people have sold out democracy for a bump in their stock portfolio. These people have deluded themselves into believing that Trump is good for the economy. These people don't even recognize the problem of toxic Stage Orange. To them, peak toxic Orange is the ideal government.

2) Alternative, non-mainstream media:

I see much of alternative media downplaying the dangers of Trump because they are blinded by their contempt for mainstream media, having built their identities and careers around it. The starkest example of this is the YT channel Breaking Points. Mainstream bad, alternative good. That is the effective sum total of their childish logic. Yet these alt media channels now have huge audiences. Their audiences are politically ignorant and easily misled. Channels like Joe Rogan and Breaking Points have spent years priming their large audiences against anything mainstream, the end result of which is not voting for Harris. These people are anti-mainstream, anti-vax, anti-bureaucracy, anti-elite. But in practice these people will just end up serving power with their bumbling naivety. These people have no idea how damaging Trump can be. These people think that Trump is a solution to the dumpster fire that is Washington corruption, without seeing that he is the gasoline.

3) Pro-Palestinian, anti-war, anti-Ukraine leftists:

These people are so obsessed with Palestinian genocide and hatred of the neoliberal establishment that they just cannot bring themselves to vote for a corporate Dem. It's all the same to them. Harris is just a continuation of Biden's complicity in genocide and endless war. These people will vote 3rd party or not at all. They will reduce politics to these two issues in this election cycle. These leftists do not properly evaluate the damage that a second Trump administration would do to all of their leftist Green ideals, as Trump guts the entire Federal bureaucracy, all social programs, and further corrupts the Supreme Court with far right ideologues and Christian stooges. But their error gets even worse. They do not recognize that Trump will be much worse on the Palestinian issue than Biden. If you think Trump gives any fucks at all about Arab lives, you are delusional. Which is why Netanyahu clearly favors Trump. By voting 3rd party you are actually helping Netanyahu to wipe Palestine off the map. But these leftists are too wrapped up in hating on Biden to see this. These leftists are so moral that they are okay with electing a fascist because they are too moral, too pure to vote for a mainstream Dem. A mainstream Dem is just too corrupt for them, but Trump is somehow tolerable. And lastly, these leftists are wrong about Trump being anti-war. Trump is a shameless lying unhinged fascist! Fascists are not anti-war. They are characterologically pro war, pro violence, pro force, pro authoritarian, pro domination, pro abuse, pro revenge. If you think Trump will save you from war, you misunderstand the basic psychology of fascists, authoritarians, sociopaths, and devils. You are gonna believe the Devil when he tells you he's anti-war? Get the fuck outta here! Perhaps Trump's greatest con is this image of him as peaceful. Wake up! There are no peaceful fascists!

Therefore, Trump is likely to win. If he wins, it will not be due to MAGA fanatics, but because of the deep miscalculations of these three groups, who have downplayed and rationalized away his corruption and danger. They rationalized it to themselves and to their followers in a shameless dereliction of leadership and dismal political strategy.

A second Trump term would be absolutely disastrous. It will be by far the most corrupt form of government that America has ever had, by an order of magnitude. The corruption will be horrific and unimaginable. Expect war, violence, abuse of power at unprecedented scale, loss of many freedoms, Federal ban on abortion, white supremacy, Christian theocracy, criminals in the White House, fraud, corporate exploitation, gutting of all good regulations, a generation-long destruction of the Supreme Court, erosion of the legal system, concentration camps for migrants, abuse of all types of minorities, gross incompetence and mismanagement, poisoning of the food and water supply, pardoning of elite criminals, stock market collapse, crypto market collapse, and perhaps the end of democracy and elections. I'm not saying this will happen with 100% certainty, but it's reasonably probable — which is a completely irresponsible thing to gamble with.

There is no equivalence. This matter is crystal clear. Trump is a monster, a devil, a criminal, and a disaster. Trump, and everyone in his administration, is POISON. They are poison minds, poison human beings. Poisoned by ego, ideology, greed, lies, ignorance, self-deception, and lust for power. If they are elected they will inject their poison into the bloodstream of not just America but the world.

Electing Donald Trump to fix the world's problems is exactly like electing a fox to guard your hen house.

With that said, Kamala Harris is a mediocre and hollow presidential candidate. But, at least she's not a ravenous poison fox.

Now, please go vote.

Your thoughts?

[Raze]

8 minutes ago, ryandesreu said:

The idea that he could "end wars with a phone call" remains largely unproven since the complexities of global conflicts typically prevent such instant resolutions.

I don’t know if he will, but the president absolutely could. If they just call Israel and say no more aid unless they ceasefire it is over. If they call Russia and say no Ukraine in nato it is more complicated but the war could end there too.

[Thought Art]

@aurum That is true about Musk. But, they are both all about image at the end of the day.

[Buck Edwards]

Just now, Thought Art said:

@aurum That is true about Musk. But, they are both all about image at the end of the day.

Goes to show how scary ego can be. 

[ryandesreu]

28 minutes ago, Raze said:

I don’t know if he will, but the president absolutely could. If they just call Israel and say no more aid unless they ceasefire it is over. If they call Russia and say no Ukraine in nato it is more complicated but the war could end there too.

If Trump called Israel and said no more aid unless they agree to a ceasefire, it could put pressure on them. However, cutting off aid might upset Israel and lead to strong pushback. The situation is complex, with many factors at play, including regional politics and the needs of both Israelis and Palestinians. A lasting peace usually needs more than just a phone call; it requires real talks and compromise from both sides.

[What Am I]

1 hour ago, aurum said:

The issue is that what is or isn’t “unconstitutional” is decided by courts. And the Right-wing has been packing courts in their favor.

Aw, come on, aurum. Pretty dirty trick to use that terminology when I'm guessing someone like you is aware of what court packing actually means.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/court-packing

Edited October 27 by What Am I

[aurum]

15 minutes ago, What Am I said:

Aw, come on, aurum. Pretty dirty trick to use that terminology when I'm guessing someone like you is aware of what court packing actually means.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/court-packing

Are you joking? The definition you provided is exactly what the Right-wing is doing. Just look at what is happening with SCOTUS.

The only dirty trick being played here is by those Republicans who claim they care about legal impartiality.

[What Am I]

10 minutes ago, aurum said:

Are you joking? The definition you provided is exactly what the Right-wing is doing. Just look at what is happening with SCOTUS.

The only dirty trick being played here is by those Republicans who claim they care about legal impartiality.

I'm not joking. Court packing means to increase the total number of judges in an intentional attempt to shift the idealogical makeup of the court. We currently have nine Supreme Court justices. If court packing were to occur, the total number of justices would be increased.

Do you get why that's dirty? It's because you're conflating the act of simply following the rules and assigning justices as the opportunity arises with a term which reflects improper behavior. Though I guess I wouldn't call it dirty if you didn't realize what it means.

Edited October 27 by What Am I

[MrTruf]

10 minutes ago, What Am I said:

I'm not joking. Court packing means to increase the total number of judges in an intentional attempt to shift the idealogical makeup of the court. We currently have nine Supreme Court justices. If court packing were to occur, the total number of justices would be increased.

Do you get why that's dirty? It's because you're conflating the act of simply following the rules and assigning justices as the opportunity arises with a term which reflects improper behavior. Though I guess I wouldn't call it dirty if you didn't realize what it means.

If the justices assigned were ones that Aurum approves of, it wouldn't be considered packing. Voila, it's a miracle

[aurum]

23 minutes ago, What Am I said:

I'm not joking. Court packing means to increase the total number of judges in an intentional attempt to shift the idealogical makeup of the court. We currently have nine Supreme Court justices. If court packing were to occur, the total number of justices would be increased.

Do you get why that's dirty? It's because you're conflating the act of simply following the rules and assigning justices as the opportunity arises with a term which reflects improper behavior. Though I guess I wouldn't call it dirty if you didn't realize what it means.

Dude what kind of pedantic game are you playing?

It doesn’t matter if it’s total amount of justices or a percentage basis. Corrupting the courts is corrupting the courts.

Right-wingers are not just “following the rules”. There has been a deeply intentional, organized effort.

Stop doing apologetics for Right-wing corruption.

[MrTruf]

1 minute ago, aurum said:

Dude what kind of pedantic game are you playing?

It doesn’t matter if it’s total amount of justices or a percentage basis. Corrupting the courts is corrupting the courts.

Right-wingers are not just “following the rules”. There has been a deeply intentional, organized effort.

Stop doing apologetics for Right-wing corruption.

Most presidents appoint judges that reflect their ideology or party values. This isn't a unique practice to Trump or any other president for that matter, it's just how the political game is played. The appointment process involves political analysis to ensure that the nominees align with certain ideological standards.

So, let's not pretend this is anything new or shocking. It's all part of the same political landscape where strategy and ideology intersect. The real question is whether the system, including the Senate confirmation process, is working as it should. But if we did that, we should broaden our horizons beyond Trump, and we don't want that, do we now?

I could give two shits about "right/left wing" games you lot are playing here, full of fear porn, never willing to look deeper.

[What Am I]

8 minutes ago, aurum said:

Dude what kind of pedantic game are you playing?

It doesn’t matter if it’s total amount of justices or a percentage basis. Corrupting the courts is corrupting the courts.

Right-wingers are not just “following the rules”. There has been a deeply intentional, organized effort.

Stop doing apologetics for Right-wing corruption.

God, I feel such an urge right now to give a snarky response, lol. It's easy to get drawn into the contentious nature of political discussion.

I'll just leave it at this. Pointing out the need for precise use of language is not pedantry, and it's definitely not apologetics. I'd consider it a valuing of the truth.

[Thought Art]

I am voting for Trump because he said "Fight!"

[aurum]

45 minutes ago, What Am I said:

I'll just leave it at this. Pointing out the need for precise use of language is not pedantry, and it's definitely not apologetics. I'd consider it a valuing of the truth.

You're smart enough to understand the essence of what I meant.

The point was that the Right-wing has been deliberately working the court system in egregiously corrupt ways. And now Trump will be able to take advantage of that in his next presidency to potentially get away with unconstitutional acts.

And this goes way beyond SCOTUS. SCOTUS is just one example. There are many other smaller courts and justices who have been influenced by this.

[What Am I]

15 minutes ago, aurum said:

You're smart enough to understand the essence of what I meant.

The point was that the Right-wing has been deliberately working the court system in egregiously corrupt ways. And now Trump will be able to take advantage of that in his next presidency to potentially get away with unconstitutional acts.

And this goes way beyond SCOTUS. SCOTUS is just one example. There are many other smaller courts and justices who have been influenced by this.

Right, and it's my understanding that if he wins this election, there's a high probability that he'll get one or two more SCOTUS picks due to a couple of the more liberal justices likely having to step down (due to age and health). I do admit, that will probably create an untenable situation, and I also admit that it appears brutally unfair to the other side. It's scary to think that despite recognizing the clear imbalance, the right may not be quick to rectify it.

I don't love the idea of court reform due to the instability it can bring, but the alternative may be worse. I'm not sure what can be done about the smaller courts. I'm not as knowledgeable of what's going on there, but I'm aware Trump and the Republicans made a concerted effort to bring in their ideal choices throughout his first term.

Edited October 27 by What Am I

[Schizophonia]

Leo gura likes too much his "measured and intelligent democrat" persona so he will manifest Trump victory.