Holy Cow! Trump is pressuring governors and legislators to take over election.
The Georgia recount is a joke and is being done UNDER PROTEST. Even though thousands of fraudulent votes have been found, the real number is in matching signatures. Governor must open up the unconstitutional Consent Decree and call in the Legislature!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 18, 2020
He has suggested the same in Michigan and Arizona.
Replies to: Holy Cow! Trump is pressuring governors and legislators to take over election.
Typical move by a dictator.
(no message)
Dictators running in an election? But, if he is a dictator, that means the election is fake.
Is it legal to have the legislatures do what the OP is alleging he is doing?
That's the question Rooney asked me when I lamented MSM and Dem leadership calling for people to "move" to Georgia to vote in the runoff.
Pretty simple position. Do you support a President coercing state legislators to flip his election.
(no message)
How is he coercing them?
(no message)
The modern dictator runs elections. He merely undermines them and makes sure he wins.
Putin has elections. So does Maduro. And Erdogan.
Make no mistake: that is where we were heading if Trump had won.
.
(no message)
Before you also change this post it means you have already made two whatabout posts in this thread.
(no message)
So? Whataboutism is a useful way to expose hypocrisy.
I was surprised to find out that you thought the election was fraudulent. (If Trump is a dictator, it must be fraudulent, no?)
No. Whataboutism is a simple-minded surrender to immorality.
OK, I agree my side did something bad....but so did yours! [or, usually: your side did something remotely similar, which I will twist to deflect this criticism]
Rather than:
My side did something bad. We should not let that happen.
Great. Then Trump's actions will justify none of Biden's. Hiba, Jim & Frank won't like that.
(no message)
It’s a more useful way to express it.
(no message)
Or, for you to expose that you don't understand the main point of my posts.
(no message)
The point that when you use it, it’s good, but not so when used by others.
Almost all of your defenses are whatabout deflections.
That point is that when I use the term, I am using it to expose your hypocrisy, not to justify Trump
Having said all of this, I would be happy if the moderators banned the word for a few months. Discourse would improve. The word was introduced to silence people. Elimination of that word would improve discussion.
Oh, okay Ned. only YOU use it to expose hypocrisy. Everyone else uses it inappropriately
and not for that purpose. Got it.
You're the bestest!
(no message)
I know that Ned, You don’t need to be so obvious about it.
(no message)
.
(no message)
Soooo, you complaining about whataboutism is a joke, Ned.
(no message)
I'm actually not complaining about whataboutism. I'm complaining about...
... how you guys use it, then criticize others who use it. You say it is not a legitimate tactic, but you use it all the freakin' time.
The best way for me to make that point is to use it against you.
Uhm no Ned, quite to the contrary.
You use it as yer main line of defense and then criticize others when they use it. For someone who takes himself so seriously you engender a lot of snickers.
Good example of why you complaining about whataboutisim is so humorous. Two already in a five post
thread.
You make no sense.
I'm fine with using the term "whataboutism" when it is used to expose hypocrisy.
I'm also fine with using the concept of "whataboutism" if one is arguing for a level playing field.
But, when people use the term to silence a defense of Trump, such as "You can't defend Trump doing X on the basis that Obama did X." ...well, that is bogus. If Obama did X and X was ok when he did it, then yes, it is ok for Trump to do it, unless and until the person saying that says they condemn Obama for doing X as well. Below, you tried to use it on me (what about Trump's pork spending, you said, to stop me from criticizing paying for gender studies degrees, something apparently very cherished by you), but I embraced the attack: I would cut all spending, not just the spending I think is moronic. Your attack failed. But, you probably didn't even notice.
This post needs some grammar help Ned. Not to be snarky, but it makes no sense.
(no message)
You want me to edit it? Done.
(no message)
The English language thanks you.
Not that you realized it, but my entire point in this thread is that your criticism of use of the phrase is the ultimate hypocrisy
I'm just glad we have you on record that you want me to edit my posts more.
(no message)
Fair point. Sometimes all the editing in the world just won’t save the effort.
You demonstrate that often.
His only chance is to convince three leglisatures to name their states' electors
He needs to convince three states to ignore the voters and choose their own slate of electors. It is quite a long shot play.
And of course it is deeply, deeply corrosive to democratic norms. But he could not give two shits about this country and its traditions.
Which makes it amazing how so many people wrap themselves in the flag and vote for him. He made suckers and fools of them all.
The real people that were fooled were the Democrats with common sense who felt the need to vote
against Trump rather than for Biden because of the pressure and threats from the far left. Moderate Democrats live in suburbs too.
"deeply corrosive to democratic norms" ... good phrase to remember.
Especially since much of the behavior of the Dems is deeply corrosive to democratic norms. But, setting aside the past 4 years of coup/resistance/insurance policies/lying to courts to surveil a campaign/etc.....
Do you think "moving" to Georgia to vote is deeply corrosive of democratic norms?
Do you think a state giving its electors to the candidate which lost the legitimate popular vote in that state is corrosive to democratic norms? Many Dem states have passed resolutions which would do this.