Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Fearmongering would be something like "Trump is going to mass exterminate Democrats if he's re-elected!!!". There's been no indication that he would do that. By contrast, he has expressed his desire to rule for more than eight years, invalidate/challenge the election if he loses, and prevent people from voting. It's not fearmongering if he flat out says/does things alarming to democracy and should be called out on it.
I'm still marveling that Chuck Grassley's twitter is a real thing that exists from an actual US Senator.
- Thx for kennedy files release Ridiculous that CIA wants to review to redact YeGods u had fifty yrs NOW CIA WANTS FURTHER COVERUP/POTUS STOP [4]
He also is known for his ongoing feud with the History Channel.
Edited by megaeliz on Sep 20th 2020 at 10:28:49 AM
>On History Channel
The awful things he says and does are burned into our cultural consciousness like a CRT display left on the same picture too long. -FighteerNot sure if this has been mentioned or is even relevant, given who we're dealing with, but the Lincoln Project tweeted a statement
that "Under no circumstances should a nomination go forward in the United States Senate." with relation to Ginsberg's passing.
Also @TheHoarseWhisperer, the Twitter megaeliz would occasionally post from re: Trump's narcissism, had a take I hadn't seen re: the SCOTUS seat. I don't think he's right, but I'm curious if anyone agrees:
https://twitter.com/TheRealHoarse/status/1307107065442316297?s=19
Regardless of what congressional Republicans want or don’t want, Trump won’t nominate someone to fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s SCOTUS sweat before the election.
Trump *wants* the election to be a referendum on who picks the next justice.
Trump doesn’t care if by rolling the dice and then losing the election he could cost Republicans a SCOTUS appointment.
Trump is only in this for Trump.
He doesn’t remotely care what Mitch McConnell might want.
When asked to clarify the statement they replied
:
If he rushed someone through before the election - if that were possible - they wouldn’t need him to win to pick the next justice because he already did.
Edited by sgamer82 on Sep 20th 2020 at 7:38:26 AM
CNN was also running a story akin to that, that they are hoping to reinvigorate his campaign.
It’s scary but it might just work.
This October surprise came a little early...
Edited by Memers on Sep 20th 2020 at 8:00:39 AM
I don't see any actual evidence that it will work.
Clinton led in most national polls, but was typically garnering support only in the low- to mid-40s. Biden’s share has been hovering around 50 percent. As a result, some of the uncertainty about the trajectory of the Trump-Biden race might be reduced, in part because there are simply fewer voters who haven’t made up their minds and because signs point to fewer third-party voters than in 2016. Combined, Clinton and Trump had secured 84 percent of support, on average, in national polls in early August 2016. By comparison, Biden and Trump currently combine for 92 percent.
There just aren't that many people who are going to change their minds at this rate. Not to mention that making it about the Supreme Court sounds like a great way to boost Democratic turnout too. I don't think it invigorating Trump's campaign is plausible or particarlly backed up by any facts.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Sep 20th 2020 at 8:03:23 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangThe problem with impeachment is it requires 2/3rds of the Senate to vote yes, suffice to say that's not possible. Any majority the Dems have will be slight.
The only viable option is court-packing.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangHe got his deal, but now he wants to make sure he profits from it, too.
So basically Trump is now trying to rip off a US company on top of shanghaiing a foreign product for his own market.
Edited by Redmess on Sep 20th 2020 at 7:01:20 PM
Hope shines brightest in the darkest timesMaybe Trump and the GOP don't need send law enforcement to intimidate voters and poll workers, just get Trumpites to do it instead: a group of Trump supporters blocked the entrance to an early voting site in Fairfax, Virginia.
They've since been disbursed.

Given what I know of Mary Trump, I wouldn't actually object to her getting a court position — certainly less so than many others at least. In a race for "least bad nominee..."
Edited by Fighteer on Sep 20th 2020 at 9:35:02 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"