| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
Also Trump - "Get them to throw out legal votes in Georgia so I can win" No bar too low, no morals, logic, or scruples to be found. He lost. What will follow is the frantic scramble of an infinitely narcissistic excuse for a man who refuses to accept that he lost. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On November 17 2020 08:53 NewSunshine wrote: Trump - "If you look at legal votes, I won" Also Trump - "Get them to throw out legal votes in Georgia so I can win" No bar too low, no morals, logic, or scruples to be found. He lost. What will follow is the frantic scramble of an infinitely narcissistic excuse for a man who refuses to accept that he lost. He has nothing to lose. He may as well just keep going. His quality of life is totally gone as soon as he isn't president. So many lawsuits/debts are just waiting for him to not be president. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Shingi11
290 Posts
On November 17 2020 09:37 Mohdoo wrote: He has nothing to lose. He may as well just keep going. His quality of life is totally gone as soon as he isn't president. So many lawsuits/debts are just waiting for him to not be president. Almost all his law suits have either been dismissed or tossed at this point. Unless he goes on another tantrum and files a bunch more he has pretty much thrown in the towel. All just theater at this point. Hopefully he can keep at cap on the extremist that he so loves to encourage. Dont need another Wittman plot with Biden | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26758 Posts
On November 17 2020 06:44 Danglars wrote: The recount in Georgia hasn't been a total waste. They have found a single voting location where 2,500 ballots were not counted from in-person early voting. AJC It is encouraging to see that more legally cast ballots will be counted. Of course, the results will not change who won Georgia or the coming runoff election for party control of the Senate. What are your thoughts on the whole pursuit of ‘it’s fraud’ being pursued by Trump currently? | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On November 17 2020 10:28 WombaT wrote: What are your thoughts on the whole pursuit of ‘it’s fraud’ being pursued by Trump currently? He claimed that he won the popular vote due to illegal aliens voting in 2016. It's no surprise he's doing similar stuff now. He'll whine until the inauguration, and leave maybe to do some media endeavors or run again in 2024. He's a pretty predictable blowhard. | ||
|
mikedebo
Canada4341 Posts
On November 17 2020 08:53 NewSunshine wrote: Trump - "If you look at legal votes, I won" Also Trump - "Get them to throw out legal votes in Georgia so I can win" No bar too low, no morals, logic, or scruples to be found. He lost. What will follow is the frantic scramble of an infinitely narcissistic excuse for a man who refuses to accept that he lost. "But we like his policies." | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26758 Posts
On November 17 2020 10:31 Danglars wrote: He claimed that he won the popular vote due to illegal aliens voting in 2016. It's no surprise he's doing similar stuff now. He'll whine until the inauguration, and leave maybe to do some media endeavors or run again in 2024. He's a pretty predictable blowhard. By the sounds of it you disapprove of this particular course of action would I be correct in saying that? | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
Apparently, this is because Iran now has enough material for 2 nuclear weapons - before Trump exploded the Iran nuclear deal, they had offloaded 97% of their nuclear materials (leaving them with not enough for even 1 weapon). So, you know, him focusing on fake fraud may be better than the alternative? A range of senior advisers dissuaded the president from moving ahead with a military strike. The advisers — including Vice President Mike Pence; Secretary of State Mike Pompeo; Christopher C. Miller, the acting defense secretary; and Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — warned that a strike against Iran’s facilities could easily escalate into a broader conflict in the last weeks of Mr. Trump’s presidency. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/16/us/politics/trump-iran-nuclear.html | ||
|
Oukka
Finland1683 Posts
How likely is Biden administration to be able to renegotiate the nuclear treaty? Or is it more of a matter of entering the existing deal that EU countries have kept up? That article suggests that Iran isn't super pushy about the weapon development, so a sufficient aid package that they'd quite likely want as a "gesture of goodwill" after corona has hit them hard is would maybe be enough and there won't be similar tight negotiations as when the treaty was first made? | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On November 17 2020 10:35 WombaT wrote: By the sounds of it you disapprove of this particular course of action would I be correct in saying that? Correct. It's a little worse than the Gillums and Abrams of the world. | ||
|
Yurie
12084 Posts
On November 17 2020 11:58 Oukka wrote: Now that would be the cherry on top if he managed to start a new conflict two months before Biden comes in and after all the "at least he didn't start a new war" talk. How likely is Biden administration to be able to renegotiate the nuclear treaty? Or is it more of a matter of entering the existing deal that EU countries have kept up? That article suggests that Iran isn't super pushy about the weapon development, so a sufficient aid package that they'd quite likely want as a "gesture of goodwill" after corona has hit them hard is would maybe be enough and there won't be similar tight negotiations as when the treaty was first made? Well current government in Iran needs propping up from the outside to not fall to internal pressure. So probably doesn't take too much. If they were a stable regime it would be much worse since they are in a better position regarding getting the bomb if I understand it correctly? | ||
|
EnDeR_
Spain2877 Posts
Sometimes it feels like republicans just want to see America burn. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22308 Posts
On November 17 2020 11:58 Oukka wrote: The last time Iran agreed because it included the unfreezing of billions in assets. That bargain chip is now gone (because they got their money back) so I don't know if Iran would be willing for the US to re-enter the treaty without some sort of aid and possible assurances that the same shit isn't going to happen again in 4-8 years. Now that would be the cherry on top if he managed to start a new conflict two months before Biden comes in and after all the "at least he didn't start a new war" talk. How likely is Biden administration to be able to renegotiate the nuclear treaty? Or is it more of a matter of entering the existing deal that EU countries have kept up? That article suggests that Iran isn't super pushy about the weapon development, so a sufficient aid package that they'd quite likely want as a "gesture of goodwill" after corona has hit them hard is would maybe be enough and there won't be similar tight negotiations as when the treaty was first made? And I somehow doubt that Republicans will happily pass it through Congress this time around (the previous deal didn't, which is how Trump was able to step out of it so easily) | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
Its not going to happen, Democrats are too spineless to do anything of the sort, but I'm interested to hear what the legally minded people here think about that idea, of just ratcheting the Supreme Court to 30ish Justices. | ||
|
Slydie
1935 Posts
On November 17 2020 18:26 Zambrah wrote: Curious about something, I heard the idea floated that instead of potentially adding like three justices to the Supreme Court, it might be better to bring it to like 30 justices to prevent it from experiencing these dramatic mood swings based on political star alignment. It would allow for a decent framing too, since it would look less power-grabby than a three seat increase and would allow the appointing of some conservative judges for the Look Good framing of it. Its not going to happen, Democrats are too spineless to do anything of the sort, but I'm interested to hear what the legally minded people here think about that idea, of just ratcheting the Supreme Court to 30ish Justices. I just checked a few supreme courts, and the 9 of the US seems very low. Germany: Too different system to compare UK: 12 Sweden: 16 Denmark: 19 Norway: 20 Spain: 79 | ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6233 Posts
As to the dems being spineless, they have almost certainly lost the senate so the whole thing is moot. With McConnell in place they will not be able to confirm a justice even if all three remaining liberals are struck by lightning, much less push some kind of radical expansion package through. We will never know what Biden would have done with a trifecta, and there's not much point speculating. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
For the constitutionalists here, the guys who think the founding fathers had it all figured out a few hundred years back.. How does one protect themselves from a spiteful "man"baby trying to sabotage the presidency of the following president? Isn't it a bit of an oversight to give the guy who lost an election months to fuck shit up properly, scorched earth style? To be clear, not only did trump ponder whether or not to bomb iran, he's also pondering to pull out all troops out of afghanistan leaving yet another power vacuum ready for the taking. Makes you kinda wonder, does it not? Sure, one would assume that people aren't so retarded as to elect a moronic manchild into office who has to be pulled out the white house by his legs while he's torching it, but, i mean.. Am i the only one who thinks it's weird that in the few coming weeks/months he can fuck shit up so badly that Biden has nothing else to do but to chase down those issues, while in four years republicans gonna argue that he got nothing done? | ||
|
Slydie
1935 Posts
On November 17 2020 21:13 m4ini wrote: So.. For the constitutionalists here, the guys who think the founding fathers had it all figured out a few hundred years back.. How does one protect themselves from a spiteful "man"baby trying to sabotage the presidency of the following president? Isn't it a bit of an oversight to give the guy who lost an election months to fuck shit up properly, scorched earth style? To be clear, not only did trump ponder whether or not to bomb iran, he's also pondering to pull out all troops out of afghanistan leaving yet another power vacuum ready for the taking. Makes you kinda wonder, does it not? Sure, one would assume that people aren't so retarded as to elect a moronic manchild into office who has to be pulled out the white house by his legs while he's torching it, but, i mean.. Am i the only one who thinks it's weird that in the few coming weeks/months he can fuck shit up so badly that Biden has nothing else to do but to chase down those issues, while in four years republicans gonna argue that he got nothing done? With how the post-election process is, I don't think the timeframe is that bad. A longer transition period does have its advantages, if the president elect is allowed to use it. All that "reporting" and "certification" required is hopelessly undemocratic and old fashioned, though, and it gives the politicians far too many chances to screw over the voters. | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
On November 17 2020 21:13 m4ini wrote: So.. For the constitutionalists here, the guys who think the founding fathers had it all figured out a few hundred years back.. How does one protect themselves from a spiteful "man"baby trying to sabotage the presidency of the following president? Isn't it a bit of an oversight to give the guy who lost an election months to fuck shit up properly, scorched earth style? To be clear, not only did trump ponder whether or not to bomb iran, he's also pondering to pull out all troops out of afghanistan leaving yet another power vacuum ready for the taking. Makes you kinda wonder, does it not? Sure, one would assume that people aren't so retarded as to elect a moronic manchild into office who has to be pulled out the white house by his legs while he's torching it, but, i mean.. Am i the only one who thinks it's weird that in the few coming weeks/months he can fuck shit up so badly that Biden has nothing else to do but to chase down those issues, while in four years republicans gonna argue that he got nothing done? This is really one of the smallest issues within the US government processes. Bottomline is, the US government simply does not work towards bettering their country, or god forbid, the lives of people who live in it but rather towards its own 'metagame' goals. I mean, at this point they accept that unless the ruling party has a senate majority, they will never actually pass any bills through the senate. AND THEY ARE FINE WITH IT LOL | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
Escore
INu's Battles
Classic vs ByuN
SHIN vs ByuN
OSC
Big Brain Bouts
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
Classic vs GgMaChine
Rogue vs Maru
WardiTV Invitational
IPSL
Ret vs Art_Of_Turtle
Radley vs TBD
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
