Plan B Forum

Insight from San Francisco:

https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/An ... 742732.php

I’ve seen all those same claims practically verbatim at various right wing places I’ve been lurking like Parler and USMESSAGEBOARD. The propaganda has rooted quite effectively.

BoSoxGal wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 23, 2020 5:04 pm

I’ve seen all those same claims practically verbatim at various right wing places I’ve been lurking like Parler and USMESSAGEBOARD. The propaganda has rooted quite effectively.

Yepper!

I'm not particularly worried about the fact that roughly 50% of the votes cast in the recent election went to Trump and the Republicans.

I'm not even frightened because someone is talking about — or has even proposed — that Trump and the Repugnicunts stage some sort of coup d'état.

But truthfully, I AM appalled by the evidence to date which shows that, of the approximately 73 million people who DID vote for Trump, a substantial number of them would be perfectly OK with — and possibly active participants in — something like that.

-"BB"-

Bicycle Bill wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 23, 2020 6:41 pm

I'm not particularly worried about the fact that roughly 50% of the votes cast in the recent election went to Trump and the Republicans.

I am. I was astonished by 2016 - if I'd had to guess, I'd have predicted 10% for someone as low grade batshit crazy as Trump. You think that even the Republican faithful would recoil and just sit this one out. The argument always seems to be that if the Dems had just found a better candidate (e.g., not Gore, not Kerry, not H Clinton) then their voters would not have sat on their hands letting the other guy in. So I assumed that would equally apply in 2016 and R voters would stay home in droves.

So even given what we knew about the guy in 2016 - the pussy grabbing, the too thick to run a casino business reputation, the won't release my tax files because they are under audit shit, the bring back jobs to America except for my shirts / Ivanka's clobber hypocrisy, all the rest - plus the additional info of the prior 4 years; and his vote actually increased to 70 million.

BB if that doesn't worry you please let us know what you are smoking and or drinking. Did you bring enough for all the class?

Could the Democrats have cheated during this presidential election? Sure they could have; they had means, motive, and opportunity. And they have cheated before, and they would do anything to get rid of trump, even destroy the Constitution. They proved that with the phony impeachment. How would you like to be judged by the same level of evidence? So could the democrats have cheated in the election? I am sure they did; especially, with so many paper ballots, it is too easy to stuff the ballot box; the only question is how much did they cheat.

ex-khobar Andy wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:01 pm

let us know what you are smoking and or drinking. Did you bring enough for all the class?

I swear by Black Diamond myself; a very powerful euphoric couch lock high that is fantastic at combating stress, anxiety, depression and insomnia as well as physical pain from inflammatory disease process.

It doesn’t make me forget entirely that nearly half the citizenry are so easily willing to fall in line against the Constitution as ‘good Republicunts’ following their Hair Fuhrer, but it does let me escape that reality for hours at a time down a rabbit hole of fiction and film.

ex-khobar Andy wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:01 pm

Bicycle Bill wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 23, 2020 6:41 pm

I'm not particularly worried about the fact that roughly 50% of the votes cast in the recent election went to Trump and the Republicans.

So even given what we knew about the guy in 2016 - the pussy grabbing,

Are you saying that Bill Clinton didn’t grab pussies?

And the genius Nobel prize-winning Obama wouldn’t release his college transcript. Wouldn’t the level be college achievement be relevant information as well?

X-KA, I merely see it as a manifestation of inertia, an unwillingness to change.  Look around you; how many people drive Chevrolets because "their Dad always drove a Chevy", or stand in line for the iPhone 12 when it's time to upgrade to a new phone because "I've always had an iPhone", or drink Bud Light instead of Miller Lite, or eat at Burger King instead of Wendy's or Mickey D's (and trust me, the fizzy water and the burgers aren't THAT much different!)?  It's because "we've always done it" ... and that also carries over to voting.

I have only anecdotal evidence, but I feel that if you were to check back in the political history of modern-day Trumpanistas, you'll find a family history of voting right-wing Republican (Goldwater, Wallace in the '68 primaries and Nixon in the general elections, and so on).  Like it says in the Hank Williams Jr. song — "I'm just carryin' on an old family tradition."

... plus there's a little bit of of the "sure he's an asshole, but he's OUR asshole!" thinking that comes into play here as well, which allows them to conveniently overlook the pussy grabbing, the 'so stupid he could bankrupt a casino' reputation, the tax files kerfluffle, the litany of lies both on the campaign trail as well as after the election, the blatant disregard of the 'emoluments clause', and all the rest.

And, like it or not, Trump is nothing if not an expert con-man.  Take your favorite huckster, grifter, or snake-oil salesman, either fictional or historical — they got nuthin' on this guy.  He (or more likely, his handlers) has already picked up on what hot topics affect or concern his targeted group (which seems to generally be a variation of "someone else is getting a better deal than I am!" for one reason or another), and he plays on those specific topics to that specific group like Yo-Yo Ma on his cello.  And so long as the suckers are willing to buy into the con, why shouldn't the con-man keep at it?

So in conclusion, maybe THAT'S what we should be most fearful of ... a slicker, smoother, less-obvious, and — dare I say it? — more likable flim-flam man who has learned from Trump's errors and comes along in the next couple of years hawking the upgraded-and-improved-for-2024 version of "Bigotry 2.0".

-"BB"-

Jim Wright, on Facebook...channeling Darren?

Trump won

Okay, Trump didn't lose

Trust me, Trump will win in court

You'll see, Trump will produce irrefutable evidence

Fine! But Trump's loss in court is really a win

Just wait, Trump still has a path to victory

Trump is beginning the transition for the good of the country

Whatever, Trump only lost because <vague reasons>

Oh yeah? Well, Trump never wanted the job anyway. Libs owned!

Trump: Bye, Losers!

<2024, Republicans nominate even shittier guy>

Trump: Miss me?

Econoline wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 24, 2020 1:28 am

When he's still losing a month from now it will be a Christmas miracle!

Bicycle Bill wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 23, 2020 6:41 pm

I'm not particularly worried about the fact that roughly 50% of the votes cast in the recent election went to Trump and the Republicans.

Can you imagine how the rest of the world view that statistic?

For those of you not following #appellatetwitter, appellate court experts have been dragging the shit out of the Trump Campaign's appeal of Judge Brann's decision, now filed in the Third Circuit, which is just some really bad lawyering that at many points veers sharply into the nonsensical. The on-target summation from Reuters Justice correspondent Brad Heath: "This whole thing is basically a Motion To Be Beaten A Second Time Because The First Time Was Insufficiently Spectacular."

I know, I know: it's ludicrous to put the words "rationale" and Trump" in the same sentence...but I still think this is the only conceivable rationale for an appeal:

Econoline wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:34 pm

Since an appeal will undoubtedly meet the same fate as the original case, the only point of an appeal is, apparently, to draw the whole thing out longer in an effort to get past the "safe harbor" deadline—in order to get state-appointed (rather than popularly-elected) Electors.

But of course in order to succeed this "strategy" would have to succeed in not one but *THREE* states, and would require the treasonous cooperation of *THREE* state legislatures.




Nah, on second thought it's just a ploy to keep the base riled up, for fundraising purposes.

AndyH has been posting emails he gets from the MAGA campaign soliciting funds for the legal battle - the fine print reveals the money is also settling campaign debts.

Yah, keeping the appeals going is definitely all about the grift, not about any substantive -- let alone winning -- legal argument. As long as he keeps telling the MAGAbase that he's "continuing the fight," he'll keep raking in the love offerings from the deluded faithful.

 

Jim Troupis, President Donald Trump's top campaign lawyer in Wisconsin, said he voted illegally.  He asked the Dane County Board of Canvassers to invalidate all absentee ballots returned in person, a method the state offered for returning ballots.  Troupis and his wife both voted in-person absentee, and he even included their names on an exhibit he gave to the board.

The attorney, Jim Troupis, asked the Dane County Board of Canvassers to invalidate all absentee ballots that were cast in person, according to documents obtained by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

Troupis and his wife both voted that way. Their names were even on exhibits he submitted to the board, according to the Journal Sentinel. "I'm sure I'm on that list," he told the news outlet.

The instructions on the absentee ballots mailed to voters in Wisconsin told residents they could mail them back with a witness signature or return them to their municipal clerk's office in person before Election Day.  If voters used the latter method to cast their ballot, they also had to show photo ID.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

At least 28 states (including Wisconsin; see WI Chapter 12:13 and WI Chapter 12:60) expressly classify voting twice in the same election as a felony in their election law statute, according to a database maintained by the National Conference of State Legislatures, a nonpartisan research group.  Several other states make it merely an infraction or misdemeanor.

So correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't he just voluntarily confessed to at least two felonies — one for intentionally voting twice, and one for assisting or advising someone (his wife) to do the same, the Fifth Amendment prohibition against self-incrimination notwithstanding?  And this is supposed to HELP his cause how??

-"BB"-

What he did is not illegal. He didn't "vote twice," he merely returned his absentee ballot to the municipal clerk's office, which was expressly permitted by the state's rules. He's now claiming it should have been illegal to vote by that procedure, so that his, his wife's and hundreds of thousands of other ballots will be invalidated. It's a patently ridiculous claim, but this is what the Trumpists have come to. At this point I can't imagine why the entire country isn't just pointing and laughing. Are Trump's supporters really so dumb that they're actually buying this act? Or are they just willing to go along with GOP trolling to pwn the libs?

I may be misunderstanding something but I don't think he's saying he voted twice. He is claiming all absentee ballots dropped off in person shouldn't have been allowed even though he did it.

ETA: Nevermind. Sue explained it before I posted. At least now I know I didn't misunderstand something.