Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[Demolitia]

So apparently the Trump campaign filed a lawsuit with a court that doesn't even have jurisdiction over what they are suing about. I don't pretend to understand the legalese but were his lawyers shitfaced when they drafted this lawsuit or is this just sheer desperation to keep their client happy?

Money well spent, Trumpkins. Keep donating.

[Hinastorm]

In a sense, though, if your product doesn't sell because you marketed it poorly, do you blame the customer for not buying it? Or blame yourself for bad marketing? And regardless of what excuse is picked to make oneself feel better, you have to realize at the end of the day... your product didn't sell. You're the one missing out on getting what you want, here (which is the adoption of your idea,) not the customer.

Politics is trying to sell ideas. If the root of an idea is good, but sold poorly so it doesn't catch on, then... well, you failed to sell it. And it's far better use of time to brainstorm a good way to sell that idea than it is to wait around until people are "enlightened" enough to truly understand whatever branding you originally chose for it because you think the purity of your idea didn't necessitate you coming up with better marketing.

"Defund the police" is a misleading name. Most people do not make the three jumps in logic upon first hearing "defund the police" and arrive at its intended meaning of "reallocate funds normally given to police departments to create a wider variety of social programs designed to individually handle various services police are currently forced to do while being largely untrained to serve those positions..." No, they arrive at it meaning a blanket "stop giving money to the police" and assume that the plan begins and ends with that because that's what those three words they were given as a slogan most logically encapsulate. The majority of the people on the street are going to think it's the latter, rather than the former, and most people don't want the latter. Which is why you have the problem of adoption.

And people can sit around all day and argue "well the average voter/citizen should educate themselves about what the actual meaning of it is and..." blah blah blah blah, but like I said... all that's going to serve to do is make sure that people don't understand you. You're not actually going to get your idea up and off the ground, which is what actually matters. Not whether you changed something's name or not.

To your point, the motto "defund the police" is not some "inviolate, sacrosanct slogan straight from the mouth of God, not to be abridged or denigrated by balking to the baser public not yet fit to understand its meaning." It's three freakin' words picked as a slogan; three words that I posit are very misleading at their outset, which is precisely not what you want a slogan to be.

Finding some other name for an idea isn't "compromising your ideals," it's finding a better name. Which I argue "defund the police" sorely needs if people want it to go anywhere.

Sorry, but you're talking as if our citizenry are normal, decent human beings with a thirst for knowledge.

About 40% of us are the exact opposite. There is no "selling ideas" to these 40% of the population. They are gone.

The LAST thing we can do for these people is shove better lives down their throat unwillingly. In very direct ways. Subsidize their paychecks, give them healthcare, give them affordable housing etc. Then when the next republican admin comes along, they threaten to take away all that, and maybe they stay on our side. It's the last move we have to try to capture these idiots.

Anything less is a waste of time.

[Demolitia]

https://twitter.com/JennaEllisEsq/st...63802818826240

I guess Trump's legal team has a new strategy...it's up to Biden to "prove" he legally won?

I mean, why not turn our judicial system on its head and demand that innocence be proven rather than a given, and that those making a claim prove their own claim rather than have those making the claim prove it on their own.

Please let him sue for wrongful termination in January.

[Zantos]

https://twitter.com/JennaEllisEsq/st...63802818826240

I guess Trump's legal team has a new strategy...it's up to Biden to "prove" he legally won?

I mean, why not turn our judicial system on its head and demand that innocence be proven rather than a given, and that those making a claim prove their own claim rather than have those making the claim prove it on their own.

Just reading the comments on that is so sad. One saying that the cheating was blatantly obvious, yet wont give any examples of how. Another saying almost empty rallies was the proof that he wasn't popular, while ignoring the fact that he did that on purpose due to covid.

The list goes on. They are ignoring all common sense. I can't wait fro Trump to be kicked out in January, since, lets be real, it isn't walking out willingly.

[Edge-]

They are ignoring all common sense.

Because that no longer exists. It's not uncommon sense.

[Sunseeker]

Just saw news Trump may announce a 2024 Presidential run, and I'm wondering: has anyone considered that when Trump is finally out of the WH he may try to play President-in-exile?

[kaelleria]

Because that no longer exists. It's not uncommon sense.

I'll raise you sheer stupidity....

This is ... different:

The Trump campaign has filed a wide-ranging lawsuit challenging the counting of votes in Wayne County (Detroit) not just in a federal district court in Michigan, but in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in D.C. — which has *no jurisdiction* in such cases:

Here's the complaint. I'm not kidding: They literally filed the W.D. Mich. complaint in a different court that only hears monetary claims against the federal government:

https://t.co/13nw83bGC7

https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/st...75988752920577
https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/st...75990506135552

[Demolitia]

Just saw news Trump may announce a 2024 Presidential run, and I'm wondering: has anyone considered that when Trump is finally out of the WH he may try to play President-in-exile?

I'm pretty sure everyone has. The question is whether he will be able to come back from exile once he can't cockblock all the investigations into him anymore.

[kail]

Just saw news Trump may announce a 2024 Presidential run, and I'm wondering: has anyone considered that when Trump is finally out of the WH he may try to play President-in-exile?

How's that going to play out? He just tweets the same crap he did during his presidency? I hope dearly that Twitter takes an ax to his account on Jan 20th.

[Felya]

Just saw news Trump may announce a 2024 Presidential run, and I'm wondering: has anyone considered that when Trump is finally out of the WH he may try to play President-in-exile?

He’ll be 78...

[Demolitia]

I'll raise you sheer stupidity....



https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/st...75988752920577
https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/st...75990506135552

Oh ye of little faith. Wait until Don asks Rudy to pull Pikachu from his deck!

[Sunseeker]

I'm pretty sure everyone has. The question is whether he will be able to come back from exile once he can't cockblock all the investigations into him anymore.

I don't even think he'd have to, it'd be more the point that he'd be far less constrained by being the actual President, and he'd have enough "true believers" to do real damage. Few actual "presidents in exile" ever return, but mostly cause harm from a far untouchable place.

How's that going to play out? He just tweets the same crap he did during his presidency? I hope dearly that Twitter takes an ax to his account on Jan 20th.

I mean, that's how it typically works, they say some stuff, their supporters go do some stuff, the president-in-exile is far enough away from the law he can't immediately be stopped, so on...

[Demolitia]

I don't even think he'd have to, it'd be more the point that he'd be far less constrained by being the actual President, and he'd have enough "true believers" to do real damage. Few actual "presidents in exile" ever return, but mostly cause harm from a far untouchable place.



I mean, that's how it typically works, they say some stuff, their supporters go do some stuff, the president-in-exile is far enough away from the law he can't immediately be stopped, so on...

Having a horde of zealots is less efficient than owning the AG and DoJ in court.
Edit: sorry I was lazy and misread your post.
The question is, you have to exile first. So far 4 countries seem to be willing to welcome him. Once he's no longer president, and bankrupt, they might change their mind.

[Zaydin]

I'll raise you sheer stupidity....



https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/st...75988752920577
https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/st...75990506135552

I linked that already and I can only assume it is as stupid as it sounds.

[Zantos]

Just saw news Trump may announce a 2024 Presidential run, and I'm wondering: has anyone considered that when Trump is finally out of the WH he may try to play President-in-exile?

At this point, I would be curious as to if they would even nominate him as their candidate after the show hes putting on. In my opinion, they would lose any credibility if they honestly backed him as their candidate after all the crap hes pulling and the huge tantrum hes throwing.

[Demolitia]

I linked that already and I can only assume it is as stupid as it sounds.

So they went full /yell WTS lawsuits?

[Fugus]

Part of me can't help but wonder just how far would Trump have to push it before Rupert Murdock finally says "Enough is enough" and pulls the cord on him and just how far does Trump have to push for OAN and NewsMax level conspiracy theories before Murdock starts to regret the monster he built.

[Flower Milk]

Oh wow, now Beto O'Rourke is also saying the same thing that AOC and Doug Jones have been saying in regards to criticism of the Democratic Party. You gonna listen yet moderates? Or are you going to keep pretending that Democrats don't need to make any changes?



https://twitter.com/PatrickSvitek/st...65359744864257

"BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT SHE SAID"

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1326235214092365826

Again, neither of us is saying GOP messaging didn’t hurt. And no one is telling folks in tough seats to adopt activist messaging.

We are saying the messaging hurt to the extent that it did because our operations & investments are not great and it makes the party vulnerable.

But if it comes from a white guy, it's different and less controversial somehow, right?

[Fugus]

Trump allies are hyping a desperate, improbable plan to replace the electoral college with loyalists who will ignore voters and hand Trump a second term.

Already talked about earlier, not possible, that ship has set sail, they can't turn their backs on their popular vote this far into it. Unless they want to directly break their state laws as well and risk all that fallout from directly telling the majority of their own voter base to "Get Fucked" on something so divisive.

[eschatological]

And I should accept his desire to avoid taking responsibility for poor campaigning, why, exactly?

If those candidates who lost relied on slogans that they allowed to be misrepresented, their campaigning was terrible and that's why they lost. Not the slogans, their ineffectual communications with the voters.

If they lost because of slogans they weren't using, then the above but way more so. They lost because of things they didn't say or support, because they were unable to get across what they did stand for.

All Clyburn is trying to do here is deflect responsibility away from the Democrats who lost. It's an attempt to avoid taking responsibility.

In short, it's bullshit.

Jaime Harrison didn't run a poor campaign.

He was genuinely fighting this message, the whole time. And apparently the message won in a seat Dems could have had.