I’m loving Trump’s efforts contesting the results of the election and his refusal to concede, not only because it puts a spotlight on America’s shoddy election process, but also because it renders his opponents silly. — NOS4A2

The hair dye dripp’n, shirt tuck’n, landscaping storefront book’n, conspiracy theory sling’n Giuliani is certainly enjoying the spotlight, and his silly antics are rather amusing.

LOL, you lost every case, came out looking like morons, and will change nothing except making Trump look like an even whinier little bitch. But, yes, keep playing make believe because you haven't been humiliated quite enough just yet. Can't wait for the Kraken to be released. :lol:

I’m loving Trump’s efforts contesting the results of the election and his refusal to concede, not only because it puts a spotlight on America’s shoddy election process, but also because it renders his opponents silly. — NOS4A2

the same voices that for three years spread misinformation and conspiracy theories of the 2016 election — NOS4A2

Let's start with step one. Who had the larger inaugural, Trump or Obama? Do you think you might have matured enough for this?

Looks like the Kraken is drowning.

There are still brainlets on predictit.org betting real actual money that Trump won.

the idea of an "Eisenhower from the right" being a contradiction in terms. — tim wood

Eisenhower was a Republican, so what is your contradiction?

What do you disagree with and why? — tim wood

American political parties are quite malleable as their basic objective is simply to stay in power. There can be a lot of turnarounds.

Besides, If the two parties have changed so much in the past, why assume them to be static in the future? Trump's effect on the GOP shows how they can change... or basically how lost they can be.

I believe there are a lot of good, decent, sensible Republicans - but they've all migrated to the Democrat Party as refugees. — tim wood

I'm not so sure that many just how static the whole political landscape is in the US.

As I've said, the Biden administration will have a very short honeymoon period. It doesn't seem that people are as hopeful as they were lets say the first time Obama got elected. The relief of the Trump era being over will quickly evaporate... I think in six months or so.

I think the idea that 73 million people are too stupid to know what's good for them is precisely the kind of elitism why about 70 million people refuse to vote for the Democratic Party. So you're part of the problem Tim.

If you'd ask me, I think party affiliation is an important factor in US group identity. For people in a multiparty system it's quite common to shift from one party to the next depending on what you think is important during a specific election. Years ago, when I first could vote, I voted like my parents did: our centre-right political party. That has lurched right over the years (but surprisingly recently, it went left, yay!) but I've voted the Party for Animals last time, because they were the only one pushing a fully circular economy. Can't get much lefter than that except for the actual communist party.

That swing isn't even possible in the US because they don't offer such a wide variety of political options. Let alone that they perceive the gap between Democrats and Republicans as huge when in fact it's a tiny crack in the political pavement.

I do think the Democrats were more "left", or let's say, they used to be social Democrats now they are just liberal Democrats that are socially progressive but economically nearly indistinguishable from Republicans. Sure, they'll raise a few taxes and tweak a social program but in essence they still pander to corporate interests through deregulations and low taxes (if not as low as the Republicans).

Fairness in advertising would require the Democrats to rename to the "Plutocratic Party (but we'll let you have your gay marriage and abortion)" and the Republicans to the "More Plutocratic Party (and, no you can't have gay marriage or abortion)". Both items which won't matter to 90% of US citizens soon any way because they won't be able to afford either.

I think the idea that 73 million people are too stupid to know what's good for them is precisely the kind of elitism why about 70 million people refuse to vote for the Democratic Party. So you're part of the problem Tim. — Benkei

Are you suggesting that people voted for Trump because they're offended that Democrat voters think they're smarter than them for voting for Trump? Seems kinda circular.

No, I'm suggesting comments like "basket of deplorables" are common. The fact Democrats play tunes for "woke intellectuals" and "salon socialists" does not resonate with blue collar workers at all. Combined with the "you're too stupid to vote what's good for you", which I've been hearing for at least 12 years now, doesn't make the Democratic Party attractive at all for regular Joe.

EDIT: Even during this election what Democrats tried was shaming people into voting against Trump. I mean, Jesus, how weak and snobby can it get?

No, I'm suggesting comments like "basket of deplorables" are common. The fact Democrats play tunes for "woke intellectuals" and "salon socialists" does not resonate with blue collar workers at all. Combined with the "you're too stupid to vote what's good for you", which I've been hearing for at least 12 years now, doesn't make the Democratic Party attractive at all for regular Joe.

EDIT: Even during this election what Democrats tried was shaming people into voting against Trump. I mean, Jesus, how weak and snobby can it get? — Benkei

"I was going to vote for the Democrats because I believe that their policies are better, but because they're telling me that their policies are better and so therefore I'd be stupid to vote for the Republicans I'm going to vote for the Republicans instead."

Is that what you're suggesting they're thinking? Because if so then the Democrats are right; these Republican voters are stupid.

My arguments are better than yours. I'm telling you. Believe me. If you don't, you're just stupid.

Not very convincing is it?

Even if I said what you think I said with that paraphrase above, which I didn't, it's still crap.

That swing isn't even possible in the US because they don't offer such a wide variety of political options. Let alone that they perceive the gap between Democrats and Republicans as huge when in fact it's a tiny crack in the political pavement. — Benkei

This is the structural problem in the US political system of having just two options. Yet the two-party system is quite aware of this huge problem.

In order for the two party system to survive, the parties themselves have to be malleable, they have to be loose in their ideology and open to change. Otherwise to system would simply collapse. They need to present the "primaries", which is for me quite hilarious, as this democratic opportunity to influence the outcome. Hence people even here can believe that Bernie Sanders and the social democrats, sorry, democratic socialists can take power in the DNC. And with the GOP, they have had already Trump taking power from the old leadership... at least for a while, so the Republicans likely have a firm belief in the system. Hence Americans believe, that democratic change can happen through the two-parties themselves.

This is in the heart of the staunch belief that Americans have in their system. Unfortunately a two-party system creates inherently a problem for representation and a situation for corruption to take root. Besides, political parties themselves are not democratic and totally open for changing their basic ideology.

For example, you have something like 13 parties in your Parliament and we have 9 political parties in our Parliament (and about 10 more registered political parties). Now imagine all those parties that have Parliament seats put into just two opposing parties. As political parties have one leadership, especially when ruling through an administration, it's obvious that a lot of views would simply be silenced and a lot of various agenda pushed now by the present political parties would simply not come out.

This is the reason just why the US is prone to have political turmoil if the economy hits bad times as many people simply don't have a party that is aligned to their political views. Without a root to voice your concerns the whole system can get shaky. The two-party system simply cannot represent all. Such hard times as now, this creates really a problem.

Americans can someday oust both parties. That can happen, even if it sounds crazy now.

There are still brainlets on predictit.org betting real actual money that Trump won. — Baden

"Brainlet" Hip term.

My arguments are better than yours. I'm telling you. Believe me. If you don't, you're just stupid. — Benkei

S, is that you?

It's incel frog talk. Picked it up from 4chan. I'm diversifying.

It's incel frog talk. Picked it up from 4chan. I'm diversifying. — Baden

Had to Google all those terms. Either you're fucked up or I'm just old, but prolly both, and by "prolly," I mean probably, as in more likely, just in case you're not up on the way the kids talk.

I’m loving Trump’s efforts contesting the results of the election and his refusal to concede, not only because it puts a spotlight on America’s shoddy election process, but also because it renders his opponents silly. — NOS4A2

Except there's no evidence that America has a shoddy election process. There's been no actual evidence presented and every meaningful claim he's filed in court has failed, even before some of his own appointees. I'm just not following how he's making anyone look silly by making unsubstantiated allegations.

S, is that you? — jamalrob

De mortuis nil nisi bonum.

I think the idea that 73 million people are too stupid to know what's good for them is precisely the kind of elitism why about 70 million people refuse to vote for the Democratic Party. So you're part of the problem Tim. — Benkei

It's hard to believe you do not know how an election works, even an American election, but so it appears. I will explain it to you. The voter gets a choice between option A and option B, no other option. Or if you think there is, what is it? Some people believe that not voting is a third option, and of course in one sense it is. But in terms of the election itself, it is not.

And I've heard and read exactly nothing of substance against the Democrat party. Are there some bad people in the Democrat party? No doubt, but "some bad people" goes with the territory. So now educate or complete the demonstration of your ignorance. What is wrong with the Democrat Party, with some evidence. And, before answering, please read the question until you understand it.

You're claiming those Trump voters were thinking? What were they thinking?

I believe there are a lot of good, decent, sensible Republicans - but they've all migrated to the Democrat Party as refugees. — tim wood

I think the idea that 73 million people are too stupid to know what's good for them is precisely the kind of elitism why about 70 million people refuse to vote for the Democratic Party. — Benkei

It's hard to believe you do not know how an election works, even an American election, but so it appears. I will explain it to you. The voter gets a choice between option A and option B, no other option. Or if you think there is, what is it? Some people believe that not voting is a third option, and of course in one sense it is. But in terms of the election itself, it is not.

And I've heard and read exactly nothing of substance against the Democrat party. Are there some bad people in the Democrat party? No doubt, but "some bad people" goes with the territory. So now educate or complete the demonstration of your ignorance. What is wrong with the Democrat Party, with some evidence. And, before answering, please read the question until you understand it. — tim wood

Perhaps someone can explain to me what you're exactly replying to.

EDIT: Quite frankly I find the only indecent thing here your assumption that 70 million of your countrymen (you know, the people you're trying to have a society with!) don't think and that none of them are good or decent because otherwise they would've migrated to the Democratic Party. Talk about a too broad brush. Jeez.

Did Trump clean up with blue collar voters? Neither set of exit polls suggest this.

You have to restrict your definition of "blue collar" to "older blue collar white voters," to make that claim, something the Republican Party does implicitly in order to make the "party of the people claim."

Now, Democrats routinely understate Trump's support with minorities. 1:10, roughly his share of the Black vote is a sizeable amount of any group. Imagine a backyard barbeque with 20 people; chances are two people would have voted for Trump at that ratio. 1/3rd for Hispanic voters is also substantial. He only lost people under 55 by around 7 points each time. The electorate isn't monolithic by demographic catagory, as it is sometimes portrayed.

At the same time, electorally, Trump loses in a landslide with the people below late middle age, let alone minorities. That's an important fact.

The income data for Trump voters is also skewed by their age. You can be 65 and have a low income from Social Security and your 401k, but have a net worth of $800,000 between your house and savings. Wealth data might be more telling (also very difficult to gather accurately).

The major irony for me is that in an election framed by the GOP as a fight against socialism, the GOP's base is of course the demographic that has universal healthcare (Medicare) and UBI (Social Security) that pays far above what Yang proposed.

That, and immigration is to my mind the unifying issue for populists in the West. Yet lower wages, and property values driven ever higher by mass migration, primarily benefit the elderly who most support the populists.

Are people too stupid to pick their leaders? I wouldn't call it stupidity. Too poorly informed and too emotional would be my verdict. Executives would be better picked like city and county managers, by a small elected panel who can vet and remove candidates based on credentials. Certainly in research, the city manager model consistently outperforms the mayoral model. Unfortunately no state has ever adopted this for the governor's seat.

Quite frankly I find the only indecent thing here your assumption that 70 million of your countrymen (you know, the people you're trying to have a society with!) don't think and that none of them are good or decent because otherwise they would've migrated to the Democratic Party. Talk about a too broad brush. Jeez. — Benkei

Clearly you have not talked to any of them. And I asked you a question that you skirted.

Except there's no evidence that America has a shoddy election process. There's been no actual evidence presented and every meaningful claim he's filed in court has failed, even before some of his own appointees. I'm just not following how he's making anyone look silly by making unsubstantiated allegations.

The US has a federal agency to regulate cheese but not an agency to regulate federal elections. America doesn’t have an election process.

You don’t have to follow but I explained it well enough. While these Twitter-parrots go on about Rudy’s hair dye, they leave his arguments completely untouched. Sworn affidavits, of which Rudy claims to have hundreds, is considered evidence the last time I checked.

Sworn affidavits, of which Rudy claims to have hundreds — NOS4A2

And I have a map to a cache of ten thousand gold coins that I can sell to you, and of course you know I have it and it is what I say it is, because I claim it.

Btw, I asked you a question just above that you have ignored, not the first time. Chicken. Pdaw puck puck puck pdaw puck puck!!!

Sworn affidavits, of which Rudy claims to have hundreds, is considered evidence the last time I checked. — NOS4A2

Judges seem to disagree, I'm afraid. See link. I've prepared and reviewed and objected to many affidavits. This sort of thing just doesn't work in a court. If the affidavits made public and referred to are representative of what's available, no material evidence is being submitted.

https://reason.com/2020/11/20/judges-are-not-impressed-by-rudy-giulianis-evidence-of-widespread-nationwide-voter-fraud/

Thanks Joe!

In early Thanksgiving news the White House turkey forgave Trump