November 2020 (or maybe January 2021)- If Trump Loses

jamie said:

Does anyone know the specific program he's talking about?

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.

https://nationalfairhousing.org/affh/ 

drummerboy said:

I could be wrong, but it appears that Trump's rally rhetoric is becoming more violent and more racist.

I am actually frightened about what's going to happen come election day.

 I'm not particularly worried about his followers, if that's what you are referring to. Most cults fall apart when their leaders collapse. If you look at the folks behind him. many are young men and women who are just enjoying the raucous atmosphere, many are older folks who are looking for the applause or boo signal. Some are not even responding. People feel safe in a crowd or hidden behind their computers. Without his rallies, they will most likely just gripe in their circles. Most people are not courageous and will just watch Trump  TV and blame the rest of the country for what is wrong with their lives. And most of them probably have at least one friend or relative who is a Democrat so no, It is not keeping me up at night. 

In the realm of where are they now, I usually point to Sarah Palin, famous for her line aimed at Obama, "pallin' around with terrorists!" He became President Obama and she went into obscurity.

Morganna said:

 I'm not particularly worried about his followers, if that's what you are referring to. Most cults fall apart when their leaders collapse. If you look at the folks behind him. many are young men and women who are just enjoying the raucous atmosphere, many are older folks who are looking for the applause or boo signal. Some are not even responding. People feel safe in a crowd or hidden behind their computers. Without his rallies, they will most likely just gripe in their circles. Most people are not courageous and will just watch Trump  TV and blame the rest of the country for what is wrong with their lives. And most of them probably have at least one friend or relative who is a Democrat so no, It is not keeping me up at night. 

In the realm of where are they now, I usually point to Sarah Palin, famous for her line aimed at Obama, "pallin' around with terrorists!" He became President Obama and she went into obscurity.

 I hope you're right, but I fear you're  terribly wrong.

The problem is that the Trump base will not accept he has been vanquished. And they will lash out.

I think we need to take a step back. We, and I mean people of all political stripes, have been talking about the “American experiment” for decades, if not hundreds of years. And what we meant by this is that the US has this unique democratic system, with checks and balances, which makes it unique (and possibly superior) in the world.

Fast forward to 2020. It took one con man, just one, to get us all to declare the end of the world as we know it. And this one con man is hardly unique, we have Boris Johnson in the good old UK, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Berlusconi in Italy, etc.

So only one of two things can be true:

1) we will be fine if Trump loses, no civil war

2) the US system of government is not so special after all, in fact it is inferior to systems of government in most civilized countries

So which is it?

basil said:

I think we need to take a step back. We, and I mean people of all political stripes, have been talking about the “American experiment” for decades, if not hundreds of years. And what we meant by this is that the US has this unique democratic system, with checks and balances, which makes it unique (and possibly superior) in the world.

Fast forward to 2020. It took one con man, just one, to get us all to declare the end of the world as we know it. And this one con man is hardly unique, we have Boris Johnson in the good old UK, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Berlusconi in Italy, etc.

So only one of two things can be true:

1) we will be fine if Trump loses, no civil war

2) the US system of government is not so special after all, in fact it is inferior to systems of government in most civilized countries

So which is it?

 What a nonsensical post. How you possibly come up with those 2 ludicrous statements is crazy,  but to claim them as the only possible "truths" is just plain nuts.

Dennis_Seelbach said:

basil said:

I think we need to take a step back. We, and I mean people of all political stripes, have been talking about the “American experiment” for decades, if not hundreds of years. And what we meant by this is that the US has this unique democratic system, with checks and balances, which makes it unique (and possibly superior) in the world.

Fast forward to 2020. It took one con man, just one, to get us all to declare the end of the world as we know it. And this one con man is hardly unique, we have Boris Johnson in the good old UK, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Berlusconi in Italy, etc.

So only one of two things can be true:

1) we will be fine if Trump loses, no civil war

2) the US system of government is not so special after all, in fact it is inferior to systems of government in most civilized countries

So which is it?

 What a nonsensical post. How you possibly come up with those 2 ludicrous statements is crazy,  but to claim them as the only possible "truths" is just plain nuts.

 Ok, so please enlighten me, what option(s) did I miss?

basil said:

I think we need to take a step back. We, and I mean people of all political stripes, have been talking about the “American experiment” for decades, if not hundreds of years. And what we meant by this is that the US has this unique democratic system, with checks and balances, which makes it unique (and possibly superior) in the world.

Fast forward to 2020. It took one con man, just one, to get us all to declare the end of the world as we know it. And this one con man is hardly unique, we have Boris Johnson in the good old UK, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Berlusconi in Italy, etc.

So only one of two things can be true:

1) we will be fine if Trump loses, no civil war

2) the US system of government is not so special after all, in fact it is inferior to systems of government in most civilized countries

So which is it?

At the time of its founding, the US system was arguably superior to most other forms. I don't know enough about the history of Britain's parliament to know how it compared to its current form in 1776, but nearly all the current democracies were not democracies at the time. It's really after WWII that you get most of the modern democratic states, and I think they benefited from the experience of history in setting themselves up. At this point I'd say that parliamentary systems work better. They have plenty of vulnerabilities of their own, but I'd argue they have stronger democratic legitimacy. While Brexit is a fiasco, for instance, it was at least something chosen by a majority of voters, as opposed to the US where the president and the senate are controlled by the party that won a minority of votes. (and yes, you can argue that Scotland being forced into Brexit despite voting against it is anti-democratic, and you'd be right, but that's not really about the UK being a parliamentary system).

Two and half centuries of experience have shown that presidential democracies tend to be unstable, and the US is actually an outlier in such systems. We've been lucky and have advantages other countries don't, though even with that less than 100 years after its founding the country came very, very close to coming apart.

More on this, from a 2015 article in Vox:

https://www.vox.com/2015/3/3/8120965/american-government-problems

From the perspective of 2020, it actually looks rather optimistic. Nothing about using heat rays against peaceful protestors, charging mayors with sedition, or refusing to concede an electoral loss.

basil said:

Dennis_Seelbach said:

basil said:

I think we need to take a step back. We, and I mean people of all political stripes, have been talking about the “American experiment” for decades, if not hundreds of years. And what we meant by this is that the US has this unique democratic system, with checks and balances, which makes it unique (and possibly superior) in the world.

Fast forward to 2020. It took one con man, just one, to get us all to declare the end of the world as we know it. And this one con man is hardly unique, we have Boris Johnson in the good old UK, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Berlusconi in Italy, etc.

So only one of two things can be true:

1) we will be fine if Trump loses, no civil war

2) the US system of government is not so special after all, in fact it is inferior to systems of government in most civilized countries

So which is it?

 What a nonsensical post. How you possibly come up with those 2 ludicrous statements is crazy,  but to claim them as the only possible "truths" is just plain nuts.

 Ok, so please enlighten me, what option(s) did I miss?

 Trump manages to win, but Dems gain the Senate. Another set of impeachments ensues, including Barr, Kavanaugh, and possibly others. I can definitely see that one, as an example. To limit your statement to 2 silly possibilities is moronic.

Dennis_Seelbach said:

basil said:

Dennis_Seelbach said:

basil said:

I think we need to take a step back. We, and I mean people of all political stripes, have been talking about the “American experiment” for decades, if not hundreds of years. And what we meant by this is that the US has this unique democratic system, with checks and balances, which makes it unique (and possibly superior) in the world.

Fast forward to 2020. It took one con man, just one, to get us all to declare the end of the world as we know it. And this one con man is hardly unique, we have Boris Johnson in the good old UK, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Berlusconi in Italy, etc.

So only one of two things can be true:

1) we will be fine if Trump loses, no civil war

2) the US system of government is not so special after all, in fact it is inferior to systems of government in most civilized countries

So which is it?

 What a nonsensical post. How you possibly come up with those 2 ludicrous statements is crazy,  but to claim them as the only possible "truths" is just plain nuts.

 Ok, so please enlighten me, what option(s) did I miss?

 Trump manages to win, but Dems gain the Senate. Another set of impeachments ensues, including Barr, Kavanaugh, and possibly others. I can definitely see that one, as an example. To limit your statement to 2 silly possibilities is moronic.

 Agree with him or not, PVW actually thought about his response. You don’t get further than calling names. You are like Trump. You are intellectually lazy.

PVW said:

basil said:

I think we need to take a step back. We, and I mean people of all political stripes, have been talking about the “American experiment” for decades, if not hundreds of years. And what we meant by this is that the US has this unique democratic system, with checks and balances, which makes it unique (and possibly superior) in the world.

Fast forward to 2020. It took one con man, just one, to get us all to declare the end of the world as we know it. And this one con man is hardly unique, we have Boris Johnson in the good old UK, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Berlusconi in Italy, etc.

So only one of two things can be true:

1) we will be fine if Trump loses, no civil war

2) the US system of government is not so special after all, in fact it is inferior to systems of government in most civilized countries

So which is it?

At the time of its founding, the US system was arguably superior to most other forms. I don't know enough about the history of Britain's parliament to know how it compared to its current form in 1776, but nearly all the current democracies were not democracies at the time. It's really after WWII that you get most of the modern democratic states, and I think they benefited from the experience of history in setting themselves up. At this point I'd say that parliamentary systems work better. They have plenty of vulnerabilities of their own, but I'd argue they have stronger democratic legitimacy. While Brexit is a fiasco, for instance, it was at least something chosen by a majority of voters, as opposed to the US where the president and the senate are controlled by the party that won a minority of votes. (and yes, you can argue that Scotland being forced into Brexit despite voting against it is anti-democratic, and you'd be right, but that's not really about the UK being a parliamentary system).

Two and half centuries of experience have shown that presidential democracies tend to be unstable, and the US is actually an outlier in such systems. We've been lucky and have advantages other countries don't, though even with that less than 100 years after its founding the country came very, very close to coming apart.

More on this, from a 2015 article in Vox:

https://www.vox.com/2015/3/3/8120965/american-government-problems

From the perspective of 2020, it actually looks rather optimistic. Nothing about using heat rays against peaceful protestors, charging mayors with sedition, or refusing to concede an electoral loss.

"Any president worth his salt is going to want to make major revisions to statutes and to alter the fiscal status quo. They're going to want to raise taxes on the rich and increase transfer programs, or slash taxes across the board while restructuring entitlement programs, or rewrite No Child Left Behind and make Medicare more cost-effective, and so on. Their legacy as more than placeholders depends on leaving some kind of legislative mark."

I agree with this. Income inequality will bring any empire down, including the US. If we don't address this, say hello to China as the next super power.

basil said:

Dennis_Seelbach said:

basil said:

Dennis_Seelbach said:

basil said:

I think we need to take a step back. We, and I mean people of all political stripes, have been talking about the “American experiment” for decades, if not hundreds of years. And what we meant by this is that the US has this unique democratic system, with checks and balances, which makes it unique (and possibly superior) in the world.

Fast forward to 2020. It took one con man, just one, to get us all to declare the end of the world as we know it. And this one con man is hardly unique, we have Boris Johnson in the good old UK, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Berlusconi in Italy, etc.

So only one of two things can be true:

1) we will be fine if Trump loses, no civil war

2) the US system of government is not so special after all, in fact it is inferior to systems of government in most civilized countries

So which is it?

 What a nonsensical post. How you possibly come up with those 2 ludicrous statements is crazy,  but to claim them as the only possible "truths" is just plain nuts.

 Ok, so please enlighten me, what option(s) did I miss?

 Trump manages to win, but Dems gain the Senate. Another set of impeachments ensues, including Barr, Kavanaugh, and possibly others. I can definitely see that one, as an example. To limit your statement to 2 silly possibilities is moronic.

 Agree with him or not, PVW actually thought about his response. You don’t get further than calling names. You are like Trump. You are intellectually lazy.

 You may be right (except for the Trump dig), but the same can be said about you. At least I responded to your post. What about mine?

I think people who are opposed to Trump, who spend time insulting each other, is just the thing Trump would love to see.

Dennis_Seelbach said:

basil said:

Dennis_Seelbach said:

basil said:

Dennis_Seelbach said:

basil said:

I think we need to take a step back. We, and I mean people of all political stripes, have been talking about the “American experiment” for decades, if not hundreds of years. And what we meant by this is that the US has this unique democratic system, with checks and balances, which makes it unique (and possibly superior) in the world.

Fast forward to 2020. It took one con man, just one, to get us all to declare the end of the world as we know it. And this one con man is hardly unique, we have Boris Johnson in the good old UK, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Berlusconi in Italy, etc.

So only one of two things can be true:

1) we will be fine if Trump loses, no civil war

2) the US system of government is not so special after all, in fact it is inferior to systems of government in most civilized countries

So which is it?

 What a nonsensical post. How you possibly come up with those 2 ludicrous statements is crazy,  but to claim them as the only possible "truths" is just plain nuts.

 Ok, so please enlighten me, what option(s) did I miss?

 Trump manages to win, but Dems gain the Senate. Another set of impeachments ensues, including Barr, Kavanaugh, and possibly others. I can definitely see that one, as an example. To limit your statement to 2 silly possibilities is moronic.

 Agree with him or not, PVW actually thought about his response. You don’t get further than calling names. You are like Trump. You are intellectually lazy.

 You may be right (except for the Trump dig), but the same can be said about you. At least I responded to your post. What about mine?

Your options are continuing the status quo, to a certain extent. And I understand that. What I am asking is, what is the end game:

1) Will things eventually get back to normal, and did our system work, in terms of checks and balances,

or,

2) Will things get out of control, so we get into a constitutional crisis, or worse.

Let's not forget, Trump is just a single con man, that's all he is. You would think that a system that is designed to maintain a stable republic, and has enough checks and balances so that a single group of people cannot get the upper hand and turn this back into a class-based society, should be able to withstand just a single bad actor, wouldn't you?

basil said:

Your options are continuing the status quo, to a certain extent. And I understand that. What I am asking is, what is the end game:

1) Will things eventually get back to normal, and did our system work, in terms of checks and balances,

or,

2) Will things get out of control, so we get into a constitutional crisis, or worse.

Let's not forget, Trump is just a single con man, that's all he is. You would think that a system that is designed to maintain a stable republic, and has enough checks and balances so that a single group of people cannot get the upper hand and turn this back into a class-based society, should be able to withstand just a single bad actor, wouldn't you?

 Sure, Trump is a single con man, but is he some guy trying to trick an old person into giving out bank information on the phone, or is he Henry Gondorff (Paul Newman in "The Sting").

Gondorff had two things going for him: (1) collaborators invested in the success of the con; and, (2) people who fell for it, who didn't want to believe that they were being conned.

nohero said:

I think people who are opposed to Trump, who spend time insulting each other, is just the thing Trump would love to see.

 It's as stupid as Batman vs. Superman.

nohero said:

basil said:

Your options are continuing the status quo, to a certain extent. And I understand that. What I am asking is, what is the end game:

1) Will things eventually get back to normal, and did our system work, in terms of checks and balances,

or,

2) Will things get out of control, so we get into a constitutional crisis, or worse.

Let's not forget, Trump is just a single con man, that's all he is. You would think that a system that is designed to maintain a stable republic, and has enough checks and balances so that a single group of people cannot get the upper hand and turn this back into a class-based society, should be able to withstand just a single bad actor, wouldn't you?

 Sure, Trump is a single con man, but is he some guy trying to trick an old person into giving out bank information on the phone, or is he Henry Gondorff (Paul Newman in "The Sting").

Gondorff had two things going for him: (1) collaborators invested in the success of the con; and, (2) people who fell for it, who didn't want to believe that they were being conned.

 Nothing as sophisticated. It's a guy in a van driving through the plate glass into the jewelry store and shouting "Communist Antifa Illegal Immigration" and 43% of the customers in the store emptying out their pockets and helping load up the van.

PVW said:

basil said:

I think we need to take a step back. We, and I mean people of all political stripes, have been talking about the “American experiment” for decades, if not hundreds of years. And what we meant by this is that the US has this unique democratic system, with checks and balances, which makes it unique (and possibly superior) in the world.

Fast forward to 2020. It took one con man, just one, to get us all to declare the end of the world as we know it. And this one con man is hardly unique, we have Boris Johnson in the good old UK, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Berlusconi in Italy, etc.

So only one of two things can be true:

1) we will be fine if Trump loses, no civil war

2) the US system of government is not so special after all, in fact it is inferior to systems of government in most civilized countries

So which is it?

At the time of its founding, the US system was arguably superior to most other forms. I don't know enough about the history of Britain's parliament to know how it compared to its current form in 1776, but nearly all the current democracies were not democracies at the time. It's really after WWII that you get most of the modern democratic states, and I think they benefited from the experience of history in setting themselves up. At this point I'd say that parliamentary systems work better. They have plenty of vulnerabilities of their own, but I'd argue they have stronger democratic legitimacy. While Brexit is a fiasco, for instance, it was at least something chosen by a majority of voters, as opposed to the US where the president and the senate are controlled by the party that won a minority of votes. (and yes, you can argue that Scotland being forced into Brexit despite voting against it is anti-democratic, and you'd be right, but that's not really about the UK being a parliamentary system).

Two and half centuries of experience have shown that presidential democracies tend to be unstable, and the US is actually an outlier in such systems. We've been lucky and have advantages other countries don't, though even with that less than 100 years after its founding the country came very, very close to coming apart.

More on this, from a 2015 article in Vox:

https://www.vox.com/2015/3/3/8120965/american-government-problems

From the perspective of 2020, it actually looks rather optimistic. Nothing about using heat rays against peaceful protestors, charging mayors with sedition, or refusing to concede an electoral loss.

I pretty much agree with you. I don't think a parliamentary system is perfect either by the way. No system is perfect, you will have to keep tuning it as new challenges arrive. As far as our current system goes, there are some things that are clearly not working anymore, Electoral College, composition of the Senate, just to name two. If we want to be competitive, we need a stable system, so this needs to be addressed.

and come the marching orders

It's pretty clear to me that Trump's strategy at this point is to incite his mob more and more, in preparation for his loss. Every day, he pulls them more and more into an intellectual abyss.

November will be very ugly.

"Steve Bannon told The Australian that if President Trump loses re-election in 2020, he’ll run again in 2024.

Said Bannon: “I’ll make this prediction right now: If for any reason the election is stolen from, or in some sort of way Joe Biden is declared the winner, Trump will announce he’s going to run for re-election in 2024. You’re not going to see the end of Donald Trump.”

https://politicalwire.com/2020/10/18/bannon-says-trump-will-run-in-2024-if-he-loses/

cramer said:

"Steve Bannon told The Australian that if President Trump loses re-election in 2020, he’ll run again in 2024.

Said Bannon: “I’ll make this prediction right now: If for any reason the election is stolen from, or in some sort of way Joe Biden is declared the winner, Trump will announce he’s going to run for re-election in 2024. You’re not going to see the end of Donald Trump.”

https://politicalwire.com/2020/10/18/bannon-says-trump-will-run-in-2024-if-he-loses/

Um.

Respectfully. 

No duh. Of course he will.

cramer said:

"Steve Bannon told The Australian that if President Trump loses re-election in 2020, he’ll run again in 2024.

Said Bannon: “I’ll make this prediction right now: If for any reason the election is stolen from, or in some sort of way Joe Biden is declared the winner, Trump will announce he’s going to run for re-election in 2024. You’re not going to see the end of Donald Trump.”

https://politicalwire.com/2020/10/18/bannon-says-trump-will-run-in-2024-if-he-loses/

OMG, that would be so awesome. That would just destroy the GOP. Can I have this for Christmas? Please?

basil said:

OMG, that would be so awesome. That would just destroy the GOP. Can I have this for Christmas? Please?

If he loses and actually leaves office, I predict he'll run as a third party candidate and he'll call it the Trump party. He may not win, but he'll get to hold his rallies and maybe some Trumpists will end up in Congress and state legislatures. He's got a base of millions of people who will support him.

So yeah, my guess is that would destroy the Republican party. He would schlorp away enough voters to ruin Nikki Haley's chances.

cramer said:

"Steve Bannon told The Australian that if President Trump loses re-election in 2020, he’ll run again in 2024.

Said Bannon: “I’ll make this prediction right now: If for any reason the election is stolen from, or in some sort of way Joe Biden is declared the winner, Trump will announce he’s going to run for re-election in 2024. You’re not going to see the end of Donald Trump.”

https://politicalwire.com/2020/10/18/bannon-says-trump-will-run-in-2024-if-he-loses/

 Unless, of course, he's in jail !

Dennis_Seelbach said:

cramer said:

"Steve Bannon told The Australian that if President Trump loses re-election in 2020, he’ll run again in 2024.

Said Bannon: “I’ll make this prediction right now: If for any reason the election is stolen from, or in some sort of way Joe Biden is declared the winner, Trump will announce he’s going to run for re-election in 2024. You’re not going to see the end of Donald Trump.”

https://politicalwire.com/2020/10/18/bannon-says-trump-will-run-in-2024-if-he-loses/

 Unless, of course, he's in jail !

The GOP may secretly send in some evidence to help put him in jail if he seems to be a threat to them in the 2024 election. And they'll blame the 'leaks' on the Dems.

sprout said:

The GOP may secretly send in some evidence to help put him in jail if he seems to be a threat to them in the 2024 election. And they'll blame the 'leaks' on the Dems.

 Not if they’re all in jail with him.

(Sorry it’s early and I’m just getting some coffee now.  I’ll be more civil soon.)

It's all speculation.

But given how Trump spins things he may say that being President is really nothing and that it was a waste of his time.

STANV said:

It's all speculation.

But given how Trump spins things he may say that being President is really nothing and that it was a waste of his time.

 I think he will never publicly concede defeat. 

they're feeling it

I'm assuming this guy is just a wacko blowhard, but this isn't useful discourse.

https://www.mediamatters.org/infowars/militia-leader-stewart-rhodes-says-his-group-will-be-polling-locations-and-ready-kill

Oath Keepers militia leader Stewart Rhodes said members of his militia will be at polling locations on Election Day to “protect” Trump voters during an appearance on far-right conspiracy theorist Alex Jones’ program.

After making that claim, Rhodes made a number of unhinged statements, including saying Oath Keepers would follow directives from President Donald Trump to take members of the “deep state” into custody and “do what we have to do,” that Trump should invoke the Insurrection Act before the election, that Oath Keepers will “be in range” of Washington D.C., to stop a “Benghazi-style” attack on the White House on election night, and that a war will have to be fought against Democrats on the West Coast who are “bought” by the Chinese government. Rhodes also hyped the possibility of a second civil war where his “battle-hardened” supporters kill the “street soldiers” and “command and control” of “the radical left.” He later claimed the United States is already in a civil war because “you have sitting politicians who are part of the enemy’s ranks.”

Disturbingly, Rhodes telegraphed how he will interpret election results, saying that he would consider a win by Democratic nominee Joe Biden illegitimate and evidence the election had been stolen, presaging how he and his militia might react to that outcome.

Rhodes’ Oath Keepers militia, which is comprised of “former law enforcement officials and military veterans,” is described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as “one of the largest radical antigovernment groups in the U.S. today.” The Los Angeles Times reported Rhodes has indicated that some Oath Keepers “have signed up as poll watchers, while others plan to monitor the election armed and ‘undercover,’ drawing their weapons if needed.”

During an October 27 appearance on The Alex Jones Show, Rhodes said members of his militia are going to “stand up and protect people on Election Day” at the polls because opponents of Trump will be supposedly “coercing and threatening” his supporters as part of an effort by Democrats to steal the election.