Politics The 2020 American Presidential Election

[nicememe]

The guy behind the polling openly called for sedition by arguing that Pence should oppose the final count of the election certificates, effectively denying Biden the presidency on illegal grounds. He quoted Stalin to make his case. That tells you much about his credibility.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I'm not really sure how your explanation answers my question on the credibility of the polling results.

 

[Mardonius]

I'm not really sure how your explanation answers my question on the credibility of the polling results.

Give it a try.

 

[Patriot Perry]

At this point if you're still for Trump you're either a retard or an asshole. Hillary was really on to something with that basket of deplorables line but I always thought she was just talking about domestic numbnuts

What a week! Remember the Georgia phone call? Trump can't go two days without stepping in dog crap. Clean sweep Dems, House, Senate, and Oval. Not sure where you delusionals are at on the fraud story but pray for Sleepy Joe, he does well, we all do well, let's all get along.

 

[nicememe]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

/pol/ is being (again) raided by reddit fags.
Raids happen fairly often in both directions, especially during major political events.
Currently, there's an enormous amount of left-wing bullshitedry there, which wasn't observed in months prior.
So I'd take 2 steps back and avoid making any sweeping conclusions based on posts from anonymous posters ?️‍

 

[riderboy]

Seen this one but didn't post because I don't know how credible this source is.
Can someone enlighten me?

Just saw it myself. He’s just going to get stronger the longer we have to put up with Sleepy Joe.

 

[riderboy]

At this point if you're still for Trump you're either a retard or an asshole. Hillary was really on to something with that basket of deplorables line but I always thought she was just talking about domestic numbnuts

What a week! Remember the Georgia phone call? Trump can't go two days without stepping in dog crap. Clean sweep Dems, House, Senate, and Oval. Not sure where you delusionals are at on the fraud story but pray for Sleepy Joe, he does well, we all do well, let's all get along.

View attachment 271160

Pray for Sleepy Joe to do well? Just what about the last 47 years of Biden’s “public service” so captivates you? He’s a moron. Literally. His record is S**t, he’s protected by the media and his brain is liquefying as we speak. Please, share with us your public declaration for the love of Biden’s......what?? Oh. And since Biden is such a rock star in your book you’ll have no trouble not invoking your Trump Derangement Syndrome.

 

[drax]

Pray for Sleepy Joe to do well? Just what about the last 47 years of Biden’s “public service” so captivates you? He’s a moron. Literally. His record is

He might be a moron - you probably have more information, than I do. But since you seem to be an avid Trump supporter I'm not sure what you are saying... Do you like the man just a little bit or a lot?

 

[primer]

If Pero had have won I do what would they have done to him.

 

[Mardonius]

Pray for Sleepy Joe to do well? Just what about the last 47 years of Biden’s “public service” so captivates you? He’s a moron. Literally. His record is S**t, he’s protected by the media and his brain is liquefying as we speak. Please, share with us your public declaration for the love of Biden’s......what?? Oh. And since Biden is such a rock star in your book you’ll have no trouble not invoking your Trump Derangement Syndrome.

One would easily be under the impression that a life-long experience with working with horses and residing in nature, would at some point result in a kind of serenity by which a man can more proficiently deal with the trials and tribulations of life. Yet, as so many followers of the Trump cult have been identified the past few days, with many of their family members now openly talking about how they have been radicalised over the years, would you mind if I beg the question: where did it all go wrong, riderboy?

 

[muck]

You know its easy to check if you were cheering the Revolution in Ukraine back in 2014 or not. Most of the mp.net threads are archived. You not gonna hide! ?

Hide? From whom? Someone who signs their posts with little devil emojis?

Do you need explaining what the differences between an insurrection, a coup d'etat and a revolution are?

In Washington, supporters of the government tried to prevent a recall of said government. That's an attempted insurrection. If that insurrection was supported by the incumbent president, arguable though that might be, that'd be an attempted coup d'etat. Either way it was an attempt to preserve the current power structure by force or threat thereof.

What occured in Ukraine was a revolution – an attempt to topple the power structure in place at that time.

I suppose you understand why different terms are used to describe such events? Why an attempt to overthrow the order from the top down is much more problematic than vice versa? Owing to the power imbalance between the government and its supporters and the rest of the people, an attempt of those at the top to resist a lawful dismissal can never be democratically justified.

If, however, a government abuses its lawful powers to remain in power, an unlawful uprising from the bottom up can be justified (albeit under very narrow circumstances).

By the way, go on – pull an all-nighter and sift through all those old threads. I remember the discussions back in the day well enough to state all you'll find will be my rejections of the Russian claim those protesters were "bought".

Suggesting that Ukrainians were incapable of thinking for themselves was a rather pathetic way of trying to discredit the protests of 2014. That's what I said and hold to be true regardless of whether or not the Ukrainians had legitimate grievances.

That's 'cause unlike you ideologues I care less about opinions than I do about the way they're being presented. Not opinions but the presentation thereof is what alienates people and prevents civil discourse, I think.

As for the Hong Kong protests – if you jolly fellows truly mean to suggest that the Chinese political system grants its citizens more freedoms and treats its people more fairly than the American one does … then I wouldn't know what to say save this: Don't be absurd. And the same goes for the other examples catapulted into this thread.

Look up the definition of the right of self-determination under international law.

If, for example, the good people of Scotland were to launch a violent insurrection against the British government tomorrow said insurrection could be justifiably quelled. Why? Because the Scottish people were given the opportunity to become an independent country – their right of self-determination was respected.

If, however, a nation or part thereof is violently denied the right to choose its own political status and determine its own economic, cultural and social development, then the UN charter holds that an insurrection against said government may indeed be a justifiable revolution. And no, that is not an idea of "the West" to legitimise its alleged double standards. It was drafted by all the founding members of the United Nations in unison.

 

[Yevgeny]

You know sometimes its better to just leave mentally sick person alone because he would be better of living in his own world. If after spending 16 years on international politics forum all you can come up with is the bunch of liberal cliches then I have nothing to discuss with you. You are not interesting to me, muck.

All I can say is what happened in Ukraine had nothing to do with "democratic choice of Ukrainian people" rather one group of oligarchs unconstitutionally taking power away from another group of oligarchs whos reperesentative was democratically elected. One of the contributing factors to the conflict between power groups was different views on energy policy. The only reason why people in the West turned a blind eye on this unconstitutional powergrab (like yourself, you just confirmed your sympathies to the protesters in your post) was the oligarchs who took power were using liberal pro-Western rhetorics.

With regards to situation in USA what we're witnessing now is democratically elected President (connected big businessman himself) fell victim to unprecedented corporate media pressure. The most likely reason for that is unlike preceding administrations he tried to remain independent of agressive forein policy agenda consistent with interests of US oil corporations. The results of Presidential election seen as unfare by Trump supporters led to mass protests that eventually turned violent. The situation is quite different from the one in Ukraine but you can still draw some parallels. What is interesting is actions taken by Trump supporters now face harsh criticism from the people like yourself and called unconstitutional and completely unacceptable. The irony is this comes from the very same people who supported unconstitutional power change in Ukraine several years ago. Thats why your behaviour became symbolic for double standarts and selective outrage.

 

[muck]

Come on, you can do better – especially after informing me so verbosely of your intellectual superiority earlier.

You're just copping out because the laws of logic, tenets of law and ordinary dictionary definitions can't be bent to your liking. Jesus Christ. How low must one stoop to end up referring to dictionary definitions as "liberal clichés".

 

[Yevgeny]

Having better English and being better polemicist doesnt make you right automatically, muck. Sometimes in-depth analysis of the situation is needed. I think thats your weak side. I'll give you a hint - just follow the money all the time. It will provide you much better understanding of the nature of political events. Alright? And Im gonna work on my English in the mean time...

Peace! ✌

 

[nicememe]

Hide? From whom? Someone who signs their posts with little devil emojis?

Good comeback, muck.

Do you need explaining what the differences between an insurrection, a coup d'etat and a revolution are?

I don't think anyone wants you to flaunt your dictionary intelligence here. Point of the matter is that you don't understand the actual events you're about to talk about.

In Washington, supporters of the government tried to prevent a recall of said government. That's an attempted insurrection. If that insurrection was supported by the incumbent president, arguable though that might be, that'd be an attempted coup d'etat. Either way it was an attempt to preserve the current power structure by force or threat thereof.

Pretty sure in Washington, supporters of Trump wanted to show their anger aimed at the authorities for refusing to investigate voter fraud. And felt that their democratic voice is being taken away from them by force, so they retaliated against a direct attack on them. I'm not really sure where exactly you dug up this entire "prevent a recall... preserve power" story from. Might be from a place where no light ever shines.

What occured in Ukraine was a revolution – an attempt to topple the power structure in place at that time.

I suppose you understand why different terms are used to describe such events? Why an attempt to overthrow the order from the top down is much more problematic than vice versa? Owing to the power imbalance between the government and its supporters and the rest of the people, an attempt of those at the top to resist a lawful dismissal can never be democratically justified.

I just did democratically justify it in my previous bit. I think you just need to try harder sometimes, and you can achieve many things in life.

If, however, a government abuses its lawful powers to remain in power, an unlawful uprising from the bottom up can be justified (albeit under very narrow circumstances).

The amount of simple-think in this is alarming. Using amateur templates to describe complex events should never be justified, neither democratically nor any other way.

By the way, go on – pull an all-nighter and sift through all those old threads. I remember the discussions back in the day well enough to state all you'll find will be my rejections of the Russian claim those protesters were "bought".

Suggesting that Ukrainians were incapable of thinking for themselves was a rather pathetic way of trying to discredit the protests of 2014. That's what I said and hold to be true regardless of whether or not the Ukrainians had legitimate grievances.

Cool story. Keep on rejecting if that helps you. Doesn't make it true though.

That's 'cause unlike you ideologues I care less about opinions than I do about the way they're being presented. Not opinions but the presentation thereof is what alienates people and prevents civil discourse, I think.

I care less about opinions, and more about actions. Because actions always say more than words.

As for the Hong Kong protests – if you jolly fellows truly mean to suggest that the Chinese political system grants its citizens more freedoms and treats its people more fairly than the American one does … then I wouldn't know what to say save this: Don't be absurd. And the same goes for the other examples catapulted into this thread.

Not really sure how different countries' freedoms tie into this. One man's freedom is another man's oppression. I'd say the amount of freedoms today in the US resemble the amount of freedoms in your modern democratic brainchild - Ukraine. Aka, getting beat up or your property destroyed by the modern-day equivalents of Mussolini's blackshirts, and then getting accused and humiliated in MSM and by the authorities for not letting the perpetrators disgrace you more than they already did. A state that walks hand-in-hand with violent thug organizations roaming the street has very little to say about how free or democratic it is.

Look up the definition of the right of self-determination under international law.

If, for example, the good people of Scotland were to launch a violent insurrection against the British government tomorrow said insurrection could be justifiably quelled. Why? Because the Scottish people were given the opportunity to become an independent country – their right of self-determination was respected.

If, however, a nation or part thereof is violently denied the right to choose its own political status and determine its own economic, cultural and social development, then the UN charter holds that an insurrection against said government may indeed be a justifiable revolution. And no, that is not an idea of "the West" to legitimise its alleged double standards. It was drafted by all the founding members of the United Nations in unison.

Yeah, it's a very funny concept you know. But you should know better than to rely on international law, given that it is intentionally written by countries to be ambiguous, providing them enough leeway to maneuver out of uncomfortable situations. And there is a huge, pretty huge, case for international law not even qualifying as "law" per se, since it is missing all 3 fundamental pillars that classify law in its traditional sense and give it legitimacy.

Talking about legitimacy, that's something you should start looking into when weighing and analyzing international events. Not everything that is legal is necessarily legitimate, and not everything that is legitimate is necessarily legal. Once law fails or does not meet the needs of its subjects, everything falls back to the question of legitimacy. And given how international law has far less legitimacy than domestic law, you kind of get where I'm going with this...

Countries can pick and choose, and if they fall back on domestic laws to prevent the right to self-determination, they won't be in the wrong, as domestic law always was and always will be more legitimate than international law. And no nutjob international lawyer will ever be able to prove it to be the other way around.

I also noticed you really like to use the word "thereof".
Just to clarify, it doesn't actually make your posts sound smarter, if that's what you're trying to go for.

 

[Yevgeny]

Please stop peddling your psuedo a near dictator is as good as democracy psycho babble. No one is buying it. In case you didnt notice, Democracy worked, trump got elected, and now he's being replaced. Has to be better than the alternative systems in places like Russia, or Iran, dont you think?

And sorry but the judeo Christian capitalist model has worked well for quite a while. I'm not aware of any country voluntarily switching to a limited or dictatorship style, and keeping it. So your shining light is this one. Sometimes a little tarnished, but when you run for a thousand years you get a little bent out of shape. Maybe you should gain some experience by living in such a country, before selling yourself to the local top dog in return for free internet or a Lada.

If you are talking about Putin, he is an elected president actually, not a dictator.

 

[Telmar]

The only place where free elections are held is Russia I guess...

The suspense on who the candidates will be, and the outcome of the election is always nerve-wracking.

I understand Russian members feel sorry for us lot where everything is manipulated by people hiding in the dark.

They just want to help us see the light.

 

[nicememe]

The only place where free elections are held is Russia I guess...

The suspense on who the candidates will be, and the outcome of the election is always nerve-wracking.

I understand Russian members feel sorry for us lot where everything is manipulated by people hiding in the dark.

They just want to help us see the light.

I think only westerners are obsessed with treating every country and every government as a nail, that requires democratic hammering.
All we're trying to do, is to point at the inconsistencies/hypocrisy that often highlights the divergence between what you say and what you do in practice.
The east never argued for the supremacy of democratic systems, maybe because democracy didn't work out all that well for them, and is still putting the pain on new terminal patients like Libya, that has been stuck in democracy for the past 10 years and doesn't know how to get out of it.

The only ones festively dancing around the room and sprinkling everyone with democratic supremacy was and still (weirdly enough) is the west. Somehow it still continues to do so, even after witnessing the failure and shortcomings back in their own respective communities.
Russia and China don't pretend to be the righteous heroic spreaders of democracy, and maintain a functional image of democracy for as far as it is necessary to sustain their ability to continue dialogue with the democratic fanatics in the west. But nevertheless understand the primacy of a more realistic, functional approach to government, wherein ensuring integrity, security and stability are a fundamental concern, regardless of what western fanaticism has to say about it.

 

[Yevgeny]

The only place where free elections are held is Russia I guess...

The suspense on who the candidates will be, and the outcome of the election is always nerve-wracking.

I understand Russian members feel sorry for us lot where everything is manipulated by people hiding in the dark.

They just want to help us see the light.

Russian opposition itself doesnt complain about election results at least about its technical side. Sometimes some minor electoral violations during the vote count are reported but it doesnt have profound effect on the overall results. Opposition mainly complains about electoral process in the sense of media coverage and so on.

Russian government indeed controls several major TV channels which allows them to promote conservative agenda among general public and to get Putin elected. You cant really call it fair but its not illegal, its not unconstitutional you know. I mean its very simplistic to say that Russian government controls all the media in the country because its not. There are many independent media outlets both liberal and conservative, both critical to Kremlin and loyal to Kremlin. Most of them are not under Kremlin control. And there are even liberal outlets critical to Kremlin controled by Kremlin. I know that sounds weird. ? I mean its quite complex....

As a matter of fact Putinism is quite interesting political phenomenon. They learned how to manipulate Russian society into following conservative line using democratic institutions, media and money. "Conservative democracy" if you will..

 

[Telmar]

Well unlike the USA, you guys have a long tradition in democracy, running free elections and free press.

I understand the eagerness to help.

 

[Yevgeny]

Well unlike the USA, you guys have a long tradition in democracy, running free elections and free press.

I understand the eagerness to help.

Ok my question to you - whats the difference between liberals and conservatives in USA? I mean all of them Republicans and Democrats alike are free-market globalist, expantionist in foreign policy, have same attitude towards same-sex marriages and so on. So what makes liberal a liberal and conservative a conservative in USA? I mean they all promote same liberal ideology...