Make Your 2020 General Election Predictions Here!

[Forestluv]

7 hours ago, Hardkill said:

Ah, I see now. So, it was really to help rally up as many Dems as possible.

I don’t know exactly how Carville and Cenk figured their 5 pt number. I was speculating.

7 hours ago, Hardkill said:

You think that Biden/Harris got enough cushion?

Yes

7 hours ago, Hardkill said:

What about some of those state legislatures in PA who as of yesterday decided to make some kind of resolution to overturn the election results in their state?

The PA Supreme Court ruled to allow certification to continue.

I think that there is enough corruption and weak spots in the system that if the election was a bit closer and Trump had a competent legal / media team he could have pulled it off.

I also I think having a two month transitional period in which the previous president retains all power is problematic. It’s been fine in the past due to adherence to traditions and norms, yet it in the context of authoritarians it’s problematic. I think there should still be a transition, yet the president-elect should be acting president by this time.
 

 

 

[Willie]

15 minutes ago, Forestluv said:

I also I think having a two month transitional period in which the previous president retains all power is problematic. It’s been fine in the past due to adherence to traditions and norms, yet it in the context of authoritarians it’s problematic. I think there should still be a transition, yet the president-elect should be acting president by this time.

I think it’s analogous to a relay race. There’s a period with the next runner in the race starting before the previous runner has reached them with the baton, and the baton is passed after the previous runner has already passed their designated portion of the race. It’s not perfect. One of the runners can drop the baton during the hand-off.

Our scenario in this election has someone who wants to keep the baton for himself. You want to change the rules of the race because one runner doesn’t want to pass the baton?

[Forestluv]

23 minutes ago, Willie said:

Our scenario in this election has someone who wants to keep the baton for himself. You want to change the rules of the race because one runner doesn’t want to pass the baton?

I care more about the underlying intention and value of rules/laws than it being a rule/law. There are many rules/laws that become outdated and we realize they are irrational, counter-productive, or useless. In Georgia, it is illegal to carry an ice cream cone in your back pocket on Sunday’s.

The original reason for having a multi month transition period in which the previous president retains power was to give enough time for a president to move to Washington D.C. via horseback. The president-elect could not be acting-president because he was moving his family across the country by horse and carriage. Times change and we need to re-evaluate rules and laws. Rules that make sense in an environment at one point in time, may not be useful in a different environment hundreds of years later.

To me, your example is hyperbolic on the innocent side. In that context, of course we wouldn’t change the baton hand-off rules. Yet we can recontextualize it to the other hyperbolic extreme. Suppose a runner figures out that if he holds onto the baton until the end transition zone he is able to release a chemical that paralyzes his competitors, allows him to hold onto the baton and win the race. In this context, we might say “Whoa! We didn’t think that was possible! Perhaps we should change the rule so the baton must be passed at the start of the transition zone”. 

If the intention is to maintain rules for the sake of maintains rules, then we would keep the status quo. Yet if the intention is to create a system that protects democracy and efficient functioning of government, then we should consider changing the rules, including systemic changes. I wouldn’t change it this lame duck period, I would consider changing it next year. From what I’ve read from other countries with coups, allowing the loser of an election to maintain power for an extended time can be problematic.

[Hardkill]

5 hours ago, Forestluv said:

I don’t know exactly how Carville and Cenk figured their 5 pt number. I was speculating.

Yeah, actually that's what I was wondering too.

5 hours ago, Forestluv said:

Yes

Alright, well that sounds reassuring.

 

5 hours ago, Forestluv said:

The PA Supreme Court ruled to allow certification to continue.

I think that there is enough corruption and weak spots in the system that if the election was a bit closer and Trump had a competent legal / media team he could have pulled it off.

That's true with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling and yes both the Trump media/campaign and Trump legal teams actually bungled a lot of it themselves.

However, after about 4 days ago when Cenk said that Trump is finally finished after Penn got certified for Biden, he now is back to saying that Republicans in PA actually has a possibility of being able to steal the election. He says that the Republicans lawmakers in PA are now going for the steal and that they have about a 5% chance of being able to pull it off by overturning the certified win for Biden and awarding their electoral votes to Biden. From what I also understand, it sounds like Cenk is also strongly implying that this kind of problem could as well happen in the other battleground states like Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Georgia, etc.

 

[Forestluv]

1 hour ago, Hardkill said:

However, after about 4 days ago when Cenk said that Trump is finally finished after Penn got certified for Biden, he now is back to saying that Republicans in PA actually has a possibility of being able to steal the election. He says that the Republicans lawmakers in PA are now going for the steal and that they have about a 5% chance of being able to pull it off by overturning the certified win for Biden and awarding their electoral votes to Biden. From what I also understand, it sounds like Cenk is also strongly implying that this kind of problem could as well happen in the other battleground states like Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Georgia, etc.

As I wrote above, I think there are weak points in the U.S. democratic system. Trump has been a stress test. If the election was a bit closer a competent authoritarian with a skilled legal / media team might be able to pull it off. 

We are fortunate there was a decent margin of victory and that Trump and his team is an incompetent clown show.  

[Preety_India]

He is purposely trying to sideline you so you will think that he doesn't care about you. 

 

[Sempiternity]

4 minutes ago, Forestluv said:

As I wrote above, I think there are weak points in the U.S. democratic system. Trump has been a stress test. If the election was a bit closer a competent authoritarian with a skilled legal / media team might be able to pull it off. 

We are fortunate there was a decent margin of victory and that Trump and his team is an incompetent clown show.  

Don't worry, the Democrats will do nothing to fix the issues Trump exposed, so next time the Republicans will learn what didn't work and do everything needed to exploit the broken system to maintain total control next election. Biden winning was just a minor few year setback. This authoritarian attempt was just a first try, of course it would fail. The most likely future major issues to come from this can of course be obverted if the Democrats learned something and take great effort to change laws to ensure this can never happen, but naww lets get back to business as usual, that should take care of it. 

[abrakamowse]

If they don't create more powerful laws to protect democracy, we will have an authoritarian government soon...

This is getting crazy...

[Anderz]

I now predict that the Democrats actually have committed massive voter fraud. The Republicans got incredibly heavy and serious witnesses! Including experts on forensics, cyber security including from the intelligence community.  And they have sworn oats on their testimonies. I can't just ignore that. Looks like pretty credible evidence to me.

So are the Democrats and the DNC corrupt? No, I don't think so. So how does that compute? If they have committed a huge voter fraud how can they not be corrupt? Well, in my opinion we have to look at the bigger picture. Think nonpartisan strategy.

[Sempiternity]

5 minutes ago, Anderz said:

I now predict that the Democrats actually have committed massive voter fraud. The Republicans got incredibly heavy and serious witnesses! Including experts on forensics, cyber security including from the intelligence community.  And they have sworn oats on their testimonies. I can't just ignore that. Looks like pretty credible evidence to me.

So are the Democrats and the DNC corrupt? No, I don't think so. So how does that compute? If they have committed a huge voter fraud how can they not be corrupt? Well, in my opinion we have to look at the bigger picture. Think nonpartisan strategy.

Soo, you have credible sources for each one of these accusations then? 

**heard it from Trump's legal team, GOP spreading lies w/o evidence, Fox News, OANN, or Trump himself, are all not even close to credible sources of facts and truth. 

[Anderz]

@Sempiternity It's just my personal opinion. Others will probably say that they are weak witnesses.

[Sempiternity]

15 minutes ago, Anderz said:

@Sempiternity It's just my personal opinion. Others will probably say that they are weak witnesses.

So you admit that you just made up that Democrats have committed massive voter fraud, and Republicans have "heavy and serious witnesses, including experts on forensics, cyber security including from the intelligence community, and they have sworn oaths testimonies", without any proof or evidence and not based on any facts whatsoever. Got it. Thanks for contributing. 

Edited November 30, 2020 by Sempiternity

[abrakamowse]

He wants it both ways Lmao!!!!

 

Trump Takes Credit For ‘Most Secure Election Ever’ But Says It Was ‘Rigged’

 

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5faec5cbc5b6d05e86e697b9

[Blackhawk]

47 minutes ago, Anderz said:

I now predict that the Democrats actually have committed massive voter fraud. The Republicans got incredibly heavy and serious witnesses! Including experts on forensics, cyber security including from the intelligence community.  And they have sworn oats on their testimonies. I can't just ignore that. Looks like pretty credible evidence to me.

So are the Democrats and the DNC corrupt? No, I don't think so. So how does that compute? If they have committed a huge voter fraud how can they not be corrupt? Well, in my opinion we have to look at the bigger picture. Think nonpartisan strategy.

 

31 minutes ago, Anderz said:

@Sempiternity It's just my personal opinion. Others will probably say that they are weak witnesses.

Oh my fucking God.

[abrakamowse]

Quote

 

Donald Trump on election night was like "Mad King George, muttering, 'I won. I won. I won,' " according to one close adviser, who spoke to The Washington Post for a remarkable recap of the 20 days since the election.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/election-results-trump-king-george-b1763487.html

[Anderz]

@Sempiternity I admit that I don't know. Like all predictions, it could turn out false. But I wanted to make the prediction and then compare it to what the actual result will be. I understand that the witnesses could even be false, but to me some of them seem like having really heavy and relevant credentials. That was what made me make the prediction.

[Forestluv]

The director of cyber security, Chris Krebs, debunks claims of massive fraud.

 

[Preety_India]

@abrakamowse irrelevant but still relevant. 

Diaper Don is so real lol

 

[Anderz]

@Forestluv I trust Chris Krebs and think that he has done an honest job as the Director of Cybersecurity (CISA). I still predict massive voting fraud though. Just in case there is an unbelievable stunt going on.

[Sempiternity]

8 minutes ago, Anderz said:

 I still predict massive voting fraud though.

Even though almost every source is saying it has been the most secure election is U.S. history. And even with the numerous recounts confirming that the results were true and there was no fraud. All facts pointing to a fair and just election. The recounts are pretty much done, the states certified, the court cases exhausted, you still think after all that there is going to be some miraculous huge out of the blue revelation of massive voting fraud? 

Not for me to understand I guess. But I honor your right to have whatever opinion you want.