Trump Cowardly Backs Out of 2nd Debate

[_Jersey Girl]

Jersey Girl
If he wins re-election, what then? I think for me, I will need to turn away from the news for the most part and live out my own life in such a way that feeds me.

Agreed. I have already started to do that and why I am making my survival videos, they get me away from the "news" and into living and seeing the gorgeous world.
But whoever wins, the next 4 years are also going to be seriously problematic. We are seeing the price of allowing ourselves as a nation of being dumbed down and believing anything that any "authority" says.

I don't think it out of the realm of possibility that "this" won't be over even within my life time, especially if Trump wins re-election. In which case, I will have to let the world go on spinning around me and invest my heartbeats on what I want to experience and not dwell on politics any longer.

We'll just see how well I do in that regard.

Life is too short, Philo Sofee, how well we know, right? And why should we spend the ride watching or fearing what others do to us when there actually is so much goodness to enjoy? Those suits in D.C. typically have nothing in common with me so why should I give them the time of day? I wasn't made for these games the only objective of which is to gain status and pile up riches.

The only status I want is peace in my soul and D.C. can't deliver that!

She's two steps away from waxing poetic. Somebody stop her!

No don't.

[_Jersey Girl]

Get. The. Mary. Trump. Book. You. Guys.

p.s. Holy crap.

[_Some Schmo]

To put it another way, you don't have to be a good person to be a powerful businessman. In Trump's case, his sickness was a prime motivating factor.

If he's a powerful businessman (dubious claim, but sort of accurate if you squint your eyes enough), it's because his father financed that reputation.

Anyone could build a reputation with a little motivation, 400+ million dollars, and millions of stupid people around to believe it. Trump is an epic fu-cking moron; he really should be a billionaire by now, but he's an incompetent fu-ck up, so he owes that money instead.

Trump's only talent is appealing to idiots. That's it.

[_subgenius]

Given the horribleness of Trump and the danger he poses to our democracy, it would have been irresponsible and cowardly for Obama not to have spoken out against him.

So, for 4 years you guys have been exclaiming "danger to democracy" but 2 years into that we saw the House go to an unassailable Democratic Party majority, and minority unemployment reach record lows, significant criminal justice reform, foreign policy successes, etc.
But I am unclear on the "threat" you have been speaking about for 48 months straight. Can you explain how our democracy is in peril in a manner that is different than say, under Obama?

[Guest]

Given the horribleness of Trump and the danger he poses to our democracy, it would have been irresponsible and cowardly for Obama not to have spoken out against him.

So, for 4 years you guys have been exclaiming "danger to democracy" but 2 years into that we saw the House go to an unassailable Democratic Party majority, and minority unemployment reach record lows, significant criminal justice reform, foreign policy successes, etc.
But I am unclear on the "threat" you have been speaking about for 48 months straight. Can you explain how our democracy is in peril in a manner that is different than say, under Obama?

First of all I want to say I respect that response. It doesn't seem all that trollish to me, and I think it deserves a thoughtful and well reasoned response.

Next, I must acknowledge that it is at least a bit hyperbolic to blame everything that ails and threatens our democracy on Donald J. Trump. It would be more correct to say that he is a consequence and symptom of certain long running trends, and merely getting rid of Trump would not be enough to fix what fundamentally ails our democracy, but I do believe it is a necessary step, that Trump will do anything he thinks he can get away with, whether fair or foul, to thwart.

The most immediate threat he now poses to our democracy is his refusal to commit to accepting the results of the election if he loses. His claim that mail-in ballots would be inherently subject to widespread fraud is disputed even by studies commissioned by strongly conservative organizations like the Heritage Foundation. His apparent determination to suppress the number of votes by any means he can devise also poses a threat to our democracy. An excellent source on how conservatives, not just Trump, have long been engaged in efforts to unfairly suppress voting, particularly by minorities who are less likely to vote Republican, is Greg Palast's Book, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy. This book has been reviewed and discussed in this very forum.

From The New Yorker:

One thing you cannot accuse Donald Trump of is trying to disguise his nefarious intentions. For months now, legal experts and Democratic campaign officials have warned that he may reject the results of this year’s election and pronounce himself the victor regardless of the vote tally. On Tuesday, Trump virtually confirmed that this is his plan. He also indicated that rushing through the appointment of another conservative to the Supreme Court is a key element of his strategy to stay in the White House.

The President has clearly been laying the groundwork for a legal challenge if the election goes against him, and he’s now confirmed that he expects the Supreme Court to play a key role. In case anybody didn’t get the message from his initial remarks on Tuesday, he repeated it. “So you’re going to need nine Justices up there,” he went on. “I think it’s going to be very important. Because what they’re doing is a hoax, with the ballots. They’re sending out tens of millions of ballots, unsolicited—not where they’re being asked but unsolicited. And that’s a hoax, and you’re going to need to have nine Justices.”

As for other evidence of how Trump threatens the viability of our democracy, we can start with this: Mapping Corruption:
The Interactive Exhibit
I will have more to about this in subsequent posts.

[_subgenius]

So, for 4 years you guys have been exclaiming "danger to democracy" but 2 years into that we saw the House go to an unassailable Democratic Party majority, and minority unemployment reach record lows, significant criminal justice reform, foreign policy successes, etc.
But I am unclear on the "threat" you have been speaking about for 48 months straight. Can you explain how our democracy is in peril in a manner that is different than say, under Obama?

First of all I want to say I respect that response. It doesn't seem all that trollish to me, and I think it deserves a thoughtful and well reasoned response.

Next, I must acknowledge that it is at least a bit hyperbolic to blame everything that ails and threatens our democracy on Donald J. Trump. It would be more correct to say that he is a consequence and symptom of certain long running trends, and merely getting rid of Trump would not be enough to fix what fundamentally ails our democracy, but I do believe it is a necessary step, that Trump will do anything he thinks he can get away with, whether fair or foul, to thwart.

Perhaps you are correct about Trump being the "conclusion", but that is overtly true for every President.
I think the fundamental error is understanding that our "democracy" and our "Republic" are 2 different things - and the former seems to imply a direct relationship to the "representative" idea in our government - and on that point I believe it is sound. Just look at the elections of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Pelosi, McConnell etc. Perhaps the Republic is more vulnerable, at times, because it is beholden to the bureaucracy and that is subject to 2, 4, and 8 year political whims. Yet it is the frequency of these whims that protects it from lasting damage. This is critical in 2 branches of of the Fed, and conversely it is critical in the 3rd - because the third should be tedious and less penetrable from the winds of the populace.

The most immediate threat he now poses to our democracy is his refusal to commit to accepting the results of the election if he loses.

His refusal or acceptance is irrelevant to our "democracy", because it has no weight. Its no like he can lock the door to the White House and direct the Cabinet, veto Legislature, and command the military. A coup is a threat, political rhetoric is not a threat (mostly because of the 1st amendment). People who clutch pearls over this idea are weak minded on how government works in this country. I mean, exactly how does Trump not accepting results translate to a threat to our democracy? You guys have literally not accepted the results of 2016 for 48 months and democracy is still here.

His claim that mail-in ballots would be inherently subject to widespread fraud is disputed even by studies commissioned by strongly conservative organizations like the Heritage Foundation. His apparent determination to suppress the number of votes by any means he can devise also poses a threat to our democracy. An excellent source on how conservatives, not just Trump, have long been engaged in efforts to unfairly suppress voting, particularly by minorities who are less likely to vote Republican, is Greg Palast's Book, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy. This book has been reviewed and discussed in this very forum.

Having a contrary opinion is not a threat to democracy, trust me it is not...its actually the foundation of a democracy (see above mentioned 1st amendment). Even if it contradicts a study, science, the pulpit, or the 'trend' - still not a threat. Believe it or not, there were people who disagreed with Obama's "claims" and we all survived.

One thing you cannot accuse Donald Trump of is trying to disguise his nefarious intentions. For months now, legal experts and Democratic campaign officials have warned that he may reject the results of this year’s election and pronounce himself the victor regardless of the vote tally. On Tuesday, Trump virtually confirmed that this is his plan. He also indicated that rushing through the appointment of another conservative to the Supreme Court is a key element of his strategy to stay in the White House.

Again, his acceptance is not required - just like how your acceptance was not required on Nov 4th 2016.

As for other evidence of how Trump threatens the viability of our democracy, we can start with this: Mapping Corruption:
The Interactive Exhibit
I will have more to about this in subsequent posts.

Apart from the source being a far-left trash pile, its not sufficient nor is it conclusive. For example, previous President's have had similar dealings - unqualified appointments, donors given loans and ambassadorships, book-deals, no-bid contracts, etc have all taken place in President administrations - you just now noticing does not make exclusive to Trump and does not make Trump "worse" than any other.
Point being, no threat to democracy.
The biggest threat to democracy/republic is people...people in large groups are the biggest threat to just about anything, especially democracy/republic.

[_Jersey Girl]

Two separate town hall's tonight. One for Biden. One for Trump. Because that's how dysfunctional Trump really is. He can't hack it.

So be it.

[_subgenius]

Two separate town hall's tonight. One for Biden. One for Trump. Because that's how dysfunctional Trump really is. He can't hack it.

So be it.

Um, Biden is the one afraid to debate in person.
Check your #tds

[_subgenius]

As for other evidence of how Trump threatens the viability of our democracy, we can start with this: Mapping Corruption:
The Interactive Exhibit
I will have more to about this in subsequent posts.

oh.
James Biden and HillStone
Hunter Biden and Burnham Financial Group
Howard Krein and StartUp Health
Frank Biden and Sun Fund Americas
Valerie Biden Owens and Joe Slade White & Company

but yeah, Trump.

[_Themis]

Um, Biden is the one afraid to debate in person.
Check your #tds

Trump is afraid of a debate in which he cannot break the rules he said he would abide by.