192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 02:23 am
Robert E. Thomas III claims to represent “New Nevada State” and “New California State” in an amicus brief.

BRIEF OF STATE OF NEW CALIFORNIA AND NEW NEVADA STATE AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FIL

This lawyer lists a Pahrump mailbox as his address.

In an interview with Business Insider, Thomas called “New Nevada” and “New California” “new states in waiting”. (link)

Although these new states are "suffering under many governmental usurpations", and the governors of the actual states were engaging in "lawless actions" by permitting same-day voter registration, the Supreme Court refused to hear the case.

0 Replies
 
Builder
 
  0  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 03:01 am
So Time magazine thinks the Kamala/Creepy Joe team are worth a cover shot and "person of the year" award?

WTF have they done?
snood
 
  3  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 03:13 am
@Builder,
The sort of ‘metric’ Time uses is, they choose the person who, “for better or worse...has done the most to influence the events of the year.”

They probably see Biden and Harris’ campaign and victory as very impactful on the events of the year.

You don’t?
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  4  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 03:16 am
@Builder,
Quote:
WTF have they done?


Assuming you're referring to Biden and Harris, they won a hard-fought election, defeating the Trump-Pence team, making Trump a one-term president. A political victory is an historical event worthy of coverage. Don't make too big a thing out of "the person of the year" thing. It's kind of gimmicky. The only person who takes it seriously is Trump.

Quote:
President Donald Trump has in the past appeared obsessed with being featured in Time Magazine, so much so that he even had a fake Time cover of himself framed and displayed at one of his golf courses.

source
Builder
 
  0  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 03:23 am
@hightor,
Quote:
Assuming you're referring to Biden and Harris, they won a hard-fought election


Biden had more staff at his rallies, than supporters, and Harris? Never heard a peep from her mouth.

Creepy Joe sat in his bunker for the last weeks of the buildup. Didn't bother campaigning, knowing that the "fix" was in.

Not much point expending energy, is there?
hightor
 
  4  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 03:29 am
@Builder,
That seems to be a strange line of criticism. No, they didn't run a Trump-style campaign with lots of mass rallies during the pandemic. Candidates can conduct their campaigns as they see fit. I found it a welcome change from the usual yelling on a soapbox hucksterism and I hope future campaigns are conducted similarly.
Quote:
Not much point expending energy, is there?

Not in itself, no. How much good did it do Trump?
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  4  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 03:31 am
HCR wrote:
Today, twenty more House Republicans, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, the top Republican in the House, and Greg Pence, Vice President Mike Pence’s older brother, signed onto the lawsuit filed by the Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton asking the Supreme Court first to take up the lawsuit, and then to throw out the presidential electors for Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia, and Michigan. If it would do so, those state legislatures could appoint a new slate of electors for Trump, thereby tossing out President-Elect Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election and handing the White House back to Trump.

Also joining the Texas lawsuit were “New California State” and “New Nevada State,” pseudo states supported by movements that want to break the rural counties of California and Nevada away from urban counties. Spokespeople for the proposed states claimed that their new states are “suffering under many governmental usurpations,” and that the governors of the actual states were engaging in “lawless actions” by permitting same-day voter registration.

And yet, this evening, the Supreme Court refused to hear the case. Two justices, Justice Samuel Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas, said they would have permitted the court to hear the case—this is consistent with their longstanding position that the court must allow states to file in a dispute between states-- but would have decided against it. So Trump, who had joined the Texas lawsuit, has lost his bid to have the Supreme Court overturn the election results.

The Electoral College meets on Monday, and Congress counts the electoral votes in a joint session on January 6. It is possible that Republican loyalists in the House will gum up the congressional acceptance of the electoral votes, but the election is over. Joe Biden will be inaugurated on January 20, 2021.

The larger story is not over.

The Republican Party has become a dangerous faction trying to destroy American democracy. Fittingly, after the Supreme Court decision, the Chair of the Texas Republican Party, Allen West, promptly issued a grammatically muddy statement saying, “Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution.”

Americans unhappy with the results of a presidential election have done precisely this before. It was called “secession,” and it occurred in 1860 when elite southern Democrats tried to destroy the United States of America rather than accept the election of Republican Abraham Lincoln to the White House.

In 1860, as today, there were two competing visions of America. In the South, members of a small wealthy class had come to believe that they should lead society, and that “democracy” meant only that voters got to choose which set of leaders ruled them. Society, they said, worked best when it was run by natural leaders, the wealthy, educated, well-connected men who made up the region’s planter class.

As South Carolina Senator James Henry Hammond explained in 1858, society was naturally made up of a great mass of workers, rather dull people, but happy and loyal, whom he called “mudsills” after the timbers driven into the ground to support elegant homes above. These mudsills needed the guidance of their betters to produce goods that would create capital. That capital would be wasted if it stayed among the mudsills; it needed to move upward, where better men would use it to move society forward.

Ordinary men should, Hammond explained, have no say over policies, because they would demand a greater share of the wealth they produced. No matter what regular folks might want from the government—roads, schools, and so on—the government could not deliver it because it could do nothing that was not specifically listed in the Constitution. And what the Constitution called for primarily, he said, was to protect and spread the system of human enslavement that made men like him rich.

In 1859, Illinois lawyer Abraham Lincoln rejected Hammond’s vision of America. In a speech at the Milwaukee Agricultural Fair, Lincoln denied that there was any such thing as a “mudsill” in America. No one, he said, should be locked into working poverty for life. Society did not work best when a few rich men ran it, he said; it worked best when government made sure that everyone was equal before the law and that ordinary men had access to resources.

Under the system of “free labor,” hardworking farmers applied their muscle and brains to natural resources. They produced more than they could consume, and their accumulated capital employed shopkeepers and shoemakers and so on. Those small merchants, in turn, provided capital to employ industrialists and financiers, who then hired men just starting out. The economic cycle drove itself, and the “harmony of interest” meant that everyone could prosper in America so long as the government didn’t favor one sector over another.

Lincoln’s vision became the driving ideology of the Republican Party.

In 1860, when Democratic leaders demanded that the government protect the spread of slavery to the West, Republicans objected. They argued that the slave system, in which a few rich men dominated government and monopolized resources, would choke out free labor.

Southern Democratic leaders responded by telling voters the Republicans wanted a race war. To win the election, they silenced opponents and kept them from the polls. And when the Democrats nonetheless lost, southern leaders railroaded their states out of the Union and made war on the U.S. government. They threw away the idea of American democracy and tried to build a new nation they would control.

That moment looks much like the attempt of today’s Republicans to overturn a legitimate election and install their own leadership over the country.

But there the parallels stop. When southern Democratic leaders took their states out of the Union in 1861, they rushed them out before constituents could weigh in. Modern media means that voters have seen the ham-fisted legal challenges that have repeatedly lost in court, and have heard voices condemning this effort to overturn our democracy. Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse (R-NE), for example, issued a statement tonight: "Since Election Night, a lot of people have been confusing voters by spinning Kenyan Birther-type, ‘Chavez rigged the election from the grave’ conspiracy theories, but every American who cares about the rule of law should take comfort that the Supreme Court — including all three of President Trump’s picks — closed the book on the nonsense."

Make no mistake, though: today’s Republican Party has drifted away from its original principles to attack American democracy. Fully 64% of the House Republican delegation endorsed Trump’s bid to steal the election. Some likely signed onto Paxton’s frivolous lawsuit because they honestly believed in it. Many others likely supported it either because they feared retaliation from Trump or they recognized that they would face primary challengers from the right in their gerrymandered districts in 2022 if they did not. Either way, the party as it currently exists is not going to repudiate this week’s anti-American stand.

But Republicans who still value democracy and their traditional values of equality before the law and equal access to resources could repudiate the radicals who have taken over their party.

They could reject the ideology of the Confederacy and reclaim the Party of Lincoln.

substack
hightor
 
  5  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 03:39 am
https://i.imgur.com/QCQ8VCG.jpg
0 Replies
 
Rebelofnj
 
  4  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 04:22 am
@Builder,
As someone who was Time Magazine's Person of the Year in 2006, I see the honor as not a big deal overall. Time also usually picks the winner of the US Presidential Election.

The only person who really cares about the honor is Trump; he was very upset in not getting the honor last year.
https://www.voanews.com/usa/trump-lambasts-greta-thunberg-time-magazines-person-year
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  4  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 04:28 am
@hightor,
Im thinking that, with the ne Congress, the GOP will have sobered up and realized how close to dismantling our Democracy thy came. NOW all those 34% need to be retired by their constituencies when they realize what a traitorous depot Trump actually is.

Maybe we can give him a "realm" around McMurdo Sound
snood
 
  6  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 06:39 am
From Twitter:

“Joe Biden has won the presidential election so many times that he is now the 67th POTUS”
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  4  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 06:53 am
Bwaaaaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!

After Supreme Court loss, Trump doesn’t attend his own Christmas party
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 07:04 am
@farmerman,
despot, i meant despot, not depot, even though his ass is as big as a bus
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 09:03 am
The difference between the Nazis and the Jews was that the Nazis were honest about who they were. Am I right or am I right?

SEAN HANNITY (HOST): What are you going to do if -- you know, all these people that impeached Trump, how do you not impeach if it's Joe Biden one day? How do you not do it? It's a foreign -- it's a family foreign crime syndicate. Got an email provided to the FBI pointing out that Hunter hadn't paid taxes on some of the Burisma payments and that's just the tip of the iceberg, with -- now they're talking about money laundering as well. You know, pretty amazing stuff, I've got to tell you. Amazing times we're looking -- living in. They all have an agenda. You know, the difference between us and them is we're just honest about who we are.

0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 09:41 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
Im thinking that, with the ne Congress, the GOP will have sobered up and realized how close to dismantling our Democracy thy came. NOW all those 34% need to be retired by their constituencies when they realize what a traitorous despot Trump actually is.

I'm at a loss to imagine what prior behaviors of the modern GOP leads you to this surmise. Do you see some reason to believe that McConnell will change the strategy he employed when Obama began his presidency?
Quote:
The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.

Do you have some indication or evidence that he will do anything at all other than obstruct Biden in every way possible - ie, denying judicial appointments, tabling bills that are likely to demonstrate to citizens that liberal policies will make their lives better or block spending that will have the same effect? (I mean, what's he doing right now on stimulus spending?!)

Do you actually think he will do anything at all which is not designed to recapture the White House?

Is it your belief that right wing media will now become sane? That they'll drop the conspiratorial lunacies that enrage their base and keep them financially viable? Do you think the con men and women spread across the party and right wing universe will turn over a new leaf?

How likely do you imagine it is that the religious right will now tip its hat to science, to women's equality, to multiculturalism and and an ethos of inclusion?

And what are the chances, I'd ask, that GOP politicos set aside what they now recognize is the present political reality - that they can have a vile, deceitful, crude, lazy, untutored and criminal national leader on par with or worse than many of the world's worst despots, a leader despised worldwide and yet suffer minimal electoral consequences?

Will they cease suppressing votes? Gerrymandering again? Will they celebrate moderates (there's what, three or four left)? Taking legal actions in attempts to overturn bad election results?
revelette3
 
  3  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 09:44 am
Most US voters don't want Trump to run in 2024 and 42% say he is 'one of the worst presidents' ever, Fox News poll finds

Quote:
42% of voters think Trump will be viewed as one of the worst presidents ever, according to a new Fox News poll.

The majority of voters hold an unfavorable view of Trump and disapprove of how he has handled major political issues during his presidency.

There are major partisan divides surrounding questions of the legitimacy of the 2020 Election.

The majority of voters don't want Trump to run again in 2024.

Forty-two percent of voters say President Donald Trump will be remembered as "one of the worst presidents" in history, according to a new poll by Fox News.

An additional 8% think Americans will recall his presidential performance as being below average.

Among Democrats, a significant 69% think Trump's term in office will go down as a disaster.

On the flip side, 22% of those interviewed think he'll be considered one of the best presidents ever. Among Republicans, this rises to 44%.

Overall, the majority of voters - 54% - don't view Trump in a favorable light.

This can be, in part, attributed to the fact the majority of voters think the country is worse off than four years ago (54%). Additionally, the majority disapprove of Trump's handling of the coronavirus pandemic (55%) and dislike how he's handled immigration and healthcare (53%).

With regards to whether Trump should run again in 2024, it's a negative from the majority of voters. 57% would rather somebody else leads the GOP into the next election.

It's a different picture among Republicans. Seventy-nine percent of Trump voters would like him to run again and 71% of registered Republicans would too. Just 10% of Democrats and 27% of independents hope to see him at the top of the ticket again.

When it comes to economics, Trump is viewed more positively. A majority (52%) approve of how he's handled the economy. His economic approval ratings have only dropped into the negative twice throughout his presidency.

The latest Fox News poll paints a mixed picture of Trump's last four years in office, with highly partisan splits coloring people's perception of the 45th president.

This is particularly accurate when looking at perceptions of how Trump has handled his election defeat.

While 58% of those interviewed don't believe the election was stolen, 68% of Republicans believe he won.

Among Trump voters, 77% incorrectly think he beat Joe Biden in November.

Fifty-six percent of voters think Trump's legal efforts to overturn the result of the election have weakened democracy - 66% of Republicans, however, think it has strengthened it.

This Fox News poll was conducted between December 6 and 9 under the joint direction of Beacon Research and Shaw & Company. 1,007 random registered voters were called. There's a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 points.
revelette3
 
  3  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 09:53 am
@blatham,
I agree with you, they will start right off the bat by rejecting all or most of Biden's cabinet picks. Probably again and again. Meanwhile getting nothing accomplished as usual.

Biden Has the Right to Name His Own Cabinet

BillW
 
  2  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 09:53 am
@revelette3,
There is something underlining a poll that includes theRump that makes me not trust them. It's not polls, pollsters or the left wing voters I distrust - it has something to do with theRump being completely dishonest and his followers inheriting that dishonesty! Polls depend on truth.
hightor
 
  4  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 10:05 am
https://i0.wp.com/www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/2021208_BrookingsMetro_TwoEconomies-Chart1Dec9-final.png?w=768&crop=0%2C0px%2C100%2C9999px&ssl=1
blatham
 
  1  
Sat 12 Dec, 2020 10:13 am
@revelette3,
Yup. Blocking his appointments (for no other reason than to stymie him and make him look bad or ineffectual) is another.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.46 seconds on 03/10/2025 at 07:10:53