Jump to content

International Current Affairs (#BidenIn)

wendybr

By wendybr
in Off Topic Forum

Recommended Posts

MartinTyler

MartinTyler

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Cynth said:

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8699759/amp/Two-Missouri-men-arrested-AR15s-shotguns-knives-Kenosha.html

 

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/boogaloo-bois-2-members-charged-with-attempting-to-support-hamas/

 

These two stories make me think that if Trump loses in November, all hell is going to break loose in the US. Too many loose canons with a bone to pick have been emboldened. :(

I'd tend to agree.....has to be bad if it's being reported like this in the Daily Mail !!

Link to comment
Davo

Davo

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, MartinTyler said:

I see that the Trump Armada hit choppy waters yesterday !!

A lot of Trump supporters are part of the anti-mask, anti-lockdown, muh freedoms, you can’t tell me what to do, if you don’t feel safe then you stay home crowd.

Now take those people, add in boat speed limits and no wake zones it’s no surprise what happens next. Sinking other people’s boats because you refuse to follow the rules is the perfect analogy for not wearing a mask in a pandemic.

Link to comment
MartinTyler

MartinTyler

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Davo said:

A lot of Trump supporters are part of the anti-mask, anti-lockdown, muh freedoms, you can’t tell me what to do, if you don’t feel safe then you stay home crowd.

Now take those people, add in boat speed limits and no wake zones it’s no surprise what happens next. Sinking other people’s boats because you refuse to follow the rules is the perfect analogy for not wearing a mask in a pandemic.

I was checking out some of the footage again and life jackets were scarce. 

Link to comment
Cynth

Cynth

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Paul01 said:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/13/roger-stone-to-donald-trump-bring-in-martial-law-if-you-lose-election?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Stone promised to keep working for Trump after he was pardoned. Hopefully the US has learnt to take them at their word. I’ve rad articles that they have started to prepare for a disputed election. Going to be ugly either way I think. 

Link to comment
Davo

Davo

Posted
Posted

As nightmarish as some of the quotes in that article are, the thing that grabbed my attention is that Roger Stone has a tattoo of Richard Nixon's face on his back.

I did a bit of googling and...

Spoiler

 

The photo was taken as part of an interview which included the unfortunate quote "You’ll never meet another man with a dick in the front and a dick in the back".

Link to comment
StringerBellend

StringerBellend

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Davo said:

As nightmarish as some of the quotes in that article are, the thing that grabbed my attention is that Roger Stone has a tattoo of Richard Nixon's face on his back.

I did a bit of googling and...

  Hide contents

 

The photo was taken as part of an interview which included the unfortunate quote "You’ll never meet another man with a dick in the front and a dick in the back".

it took 14 hours I fainted three times

Link to comment
Davo

Davo

Posted
Posted

It’ll be interesting to see how the Republicans play this.

The R controlled senate refused to confirm Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland in 2016 because it was as election year and “the people should decide”. I fully expect them to be hypocrites and claim things are somehow different this time but the timing of their move is important.

If they rush through a justice before the election then they’ll need pretty much all of the Republican senators to tow the line. That exposes a bunch who are at risk of losing their seats. Susan Collins copped a lot when she voted to confirm Boofin’ Brett Kavanaugh and this could be the tipping point for a few more in a senate that’s looking more and more likely to turn blue. If they go down this path it’s pretty much guaranteed Trump is bringing in someone to back up his election shithousery.

My guess is they’ll wait until after the election but before the next Congress is sworn in. That way they shield the senate from having to publicly back someone. Mitch McConnell can even play the good guy and say they’ll honour what they did four years ago and hold off until after the election. If they win he can claim the high ground and if they lose he’ll tell some story about how the Democrats cheated and he needs to confirm a justice to protect America or some similar bullshit. The only risk is whether they can get someone through quick enough to mess with the election fight which will inevitably end up in the Supreme Court.

Link to comment
sonar

sonar

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Davo said:

It’ll be interesting to see how the Republicans play this.

The R controlled senate refused to confirm Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland in 2016 because it was as election year and “the people should decide”. I fully expect them to be hypocrites and claim things are somehow different this time but the timing of their move is important.

If they rush through a justice before the election then they’ll need pretty much all of the Republican senators to tow the line. That exposes a bunch who are at risk of losing their seats. Susan Collins copped a lot when she voted to confirm Boofin’ Brett Kavanaugh and this could be the tipping point for a few more in a senate that’s looking more and more likely to turn blue. If they go down this path it’s pretty much guaranteed Trump is bringing in someone to back up his election shithousery.

My guess is they’ll wait until after the election but before the next Congress is sworn in. That way they shield the senate from having to publicly back someone. Mitch McConnell can even play the good guy and say they’ll honour what they did four years ago and hold off until after the election. If they win he can claim the high ground and if they lose he’ll tell some story about how the Democrats cheated and he needs to confirm a justice to protect America or some similar bullshit. The only risk is whether they can get someone through quick enough to mess with the election fight which will inevitably end up in the Supreme Court.

There seems to be at least three or four Republican Senators that have come out and stated that they will oppose any Trump nominee...Mitt Romney is one.

https://edition.cnn.com/us/live-news/ruth-bader-ginsburg-death-live-updates/h_73403b4eaf42724ec9db79154591d223

Link to comment
Davo

Davo

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, sonar said:

There seems to be at least three or four Republican Senators that have come out and stated that they will oppose any Trump nominee...Mitt Romney is one.

https://edition.cnn.com/us/live-news/ruth-bader-ginsburg-death-live-updates/h_73403b4eaf42724ec9db79154591d223

The media needs to make them clarify what that means. If they won’t vote to confirm a new justice that doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll vote no, they could just abstain. Lisa Murkowski is one of the four in that article and during the Kavanaugh confirmation she didn’t vote either way, she just got marked as present. If two of the four abstain and two vote no that means the vote is 49-49. Ties in the senate are broken by the Vice President and we know how Pence will vote. Need at least three Republicans to not only not vote yes but actually vote no.

Also I wouldn’t trust Lindsay Graham as the quote they used for him was in 2018. He’s one of Trumps biggest supporters but was one of his biggest critics during the primaries. He’ll say whatever he needs to say at the time.

Romney is an interesting one. He voted for Trumps removal from office after the impeachment so it’s possible, but he’s also extremely religious. If Trump dangles a staunch anti-abortion nominee I wouldn’t be surprised if he supported it and it wouldn’t cost him any votes in Mormon heavy Utah.

Trump said overnight that he expects to make his nomination in a week. One issue Trump has is that he isn’t polling as well as he should with Christians outside of the hardcore evangelicals, probably because he doesn’t exactly exude Christian values. If his nomination is a Christian pushing family values who hints at being anti-abortion without making it a key issue to energise the pro choice crowd, and the Republican senators say the only way to get them in is to vote for Trump that could give him a bump in the polls.

Link to comment
pseudonym

pseudonym

Posted
Posted

I think it helps Trump slightly

Given Covid and Trump's personality, some nominal Republican voters may have stayed at home

But now with a Supreme Court pick on the line, they may now turn up as they would believe Biden would pick someone very liberal (sigh, I wish)

rMXr35V6rD63NVB0Ofs4ECPC3Yas3XhV8yFBsIpFSbU.jpg?auto=webp&s=4342ae8f3b166a5642404f7d0c2093fd76224cd8

"I don't like remarks about the troops but a Supreme Court pick is a Supreme Court pick"

Link to comment
mack

mack

Posted
Posted

I highly doubt it's going to be 'on the line' by the time of the election. Trump said he's going to pick a woman and it's probably going to be Amy Coney Barrett (three names, always an indicator of sociopathy). Pretty much a female Kavanaugh without the alcoholism. Catholic anti-choice, hate the poor, will rubber stamp Republicans corruption. Could be on the court for 40 years.

The Dems have no way of stopping an appointment. They'd have to convince a handful of Republicans to switch sides. My guess is a couple of them get a 'free pass' to vote no, or to abstain, if it's politically expedient for re-elections, but it will be stage managed to ensure the vote still passes.

Link to comment
Davo

Davo

Posted
Posted

The other issue with the Republicans leaving a vote until the lame duck period is the Arizona senate vote.

After John McCain’s death the seat has been held on an interim basis, so this is a special election. The winner doesn’t get sworn in with the rest of congress in January, and based on Arizona’s laws could be sworn in by late November.

The Republican incumbent is behind in the polls so within a month of the election the senate could go from 53-47 to 52-48.

Link to comment
Davo

Davo

Posted
Posted

That's Romney out. He wasn't a senator in 2016 as he ran for President so as far as I can tell he didn't take a side on the Merrick Garland issue, which protects him a little from the accusations of hypocrisy.

Link to comment
  • mack changed the title to International Current Affairs (#BidenIn)
  • mack locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...