2020 US Presidential Election

[221101 Voyager]

Seems a bit of a shallow way of picking someone. You don't want them because they seem weak when talking - so you're ignoring anything about their personality or beliefs, right?

Personally I'd rather go by their beliefs, record and actions. And on that score, well, it's a no-brainer.... Trump routinely spouts silly conspiracy theories where Biden normally seems to follow the science and the evidence. Trump has said and done numerous things that suggest he is a racist, whereas Biden on the whole hasn't. Trump routinely lies (as revealed for example by regular fact-checks of his interviews and Twitter feed) where Biden routinely seems to tell the truth. Trump has spent 4 years leading the most chaotic and clearly incompetent presidency in living memory, where Biden was previously vice-president in an administration that wasn't perfect but seemed pretty competent and professionally run. Trump routinely speaks words of hatred, seeks to provoke violence against opponents, and generally shows complete contempt for democratic traditions, where Biden appears to totally respect democratic principles.

But hey, dismiss them both as if they were equally bad, just because Biden doesn't come across as strong enough when he speaks?

What I’ve said earlier in this thread was that I’ve seen them both on tv in action in debates and wouldn’t pick either of them.

 

[birchesgreen]

I wonder if this could backfire on the Republicans slightly, any wavering Democrats (if there are any) might see this as the final straw.

 

[jfollows]

Biden is only four years older than Trump and probably in better health given his diet and weight. You don't appear to be aware that the Americans also elect a vice president, so there is a named individual ready to take over not some "dodgy random" as you claim. Biden's is Kamala Harris, 55 and from what I can see has one of the sharpest minds on the block. Trump's is Mike Pence, something of a non-entity probably best known for his religious and political views that put him well to the right of Trump.

I wouldn't phrase it this way - Americans elect a combination of president & vice-president, they don't get a separate choice for each. This became clear to me when I saw the ballot which I posted earlier ( #280 ). Yes, the name of the vice-president appears on the ballot, but there's no real election for the post, I wouldn't say.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Great news that your party lost the last veneer of respectability to many and confirmed itself as one of rank hypocrisy?

There is plenty of hypocrisy on both sides - oodles of it. I really have come to the conclusion many people don’t care anymore.

 

[najaB]

I wouldn't phrase it this way - Americans elect a combination of president & vice-president, they don't get a separate choice for each.

That's not correct. The American public vote for their State's electors, who in turn vote separately for President and Vice President. It is entirely possible (and did happen in 1796) for the President and Vice President to be from different parties.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

But you said it was only fair to wait until after the election. Now it's great news that they haven't?

I will reply more fully later. Those statements are not in conflict imho. As an example if a company had a bonus pot of 100,000 pounds to share out for completing a project to time and budget I would say it would be fair to share it out equally with all who participate. However, if they chose to give me a big chunk I would be absolutely delighted and go home and tell my family great news. But I would still believe it would have been fairer to share the pot out equally.

So I stand by my posts. I am over the moon and think it great news about ACB but it would have been fairer to wait until after the election.

 

[edwin_m]

I wouldn't phrase it this way - Americans elect a combination of president & vice-president, they don't get a separate choice for each. This became clear to me when I saw the ballot which I posted earlier ( #280 ). Yes, the name of the vice-president appears on the ballot, but there's no real election for the post, I wouldn't say.

You vote for the team and the choice of VP candidate can help or hinder their chances. McCain's choice of Sarah Palin is thought to have damaged him quite badly in 2008, and Dan Quayle was considered a laughing stock. I'd say the choice of Kamala Harris has helped Biden on balance in that she's obviously competent to take over if needed, has a law and order background that should appeal to centrists and also brings more diversity to the ticket. Any racists and sexists discouraged by that are far more likely to be voting for the other side already, but there's a risk that her record as a prosecutor will put off some on the left.

That's not correct. The American public vote for their State's electors, who in turn vote separately for President and Vice President. It is entirely possible (and did happen in 1796) for the President and Vice President to be from different parties.

In principle yes, and there's speculation that the Trump side will try to use loopholes like that to change the result if they are losing. Before 2016 I think most people thought the American constitution was well provided with checks and balances, but a lot of these turn out to be conventions rather than having legal force, so don't restrain someone who pays no regard to convention...

There is plenty of hypocrisy on both sides - oodles of it. I really have come to the conclusion many people don’t care anymore.

I won't let that one rest unanswered.

From where I stand there's no comparison between the two sides. Trump used the "all as bad as each other" argument implicitly in 2016, attacking Hillary Clinton mainly for using a private server for government emails. Amongst the dozens or hundreds of scandals emerging from the Trump dynasty it seems one of his interchangeable children was doing the same thing. This time it's going after Hunter Biden.

One of the smaller but more obvious scandals: Trump goes golfing far more often than he attacked Obama for, nearly always to one of his own courses. So all his Secret Service and others that have to stay close to him must stay at the same place and pay the Trump organisation for the privilege. That's blatantly profiteering from public office in my book.
So as far as I'm concerned saying there is bad stuff on both sides is trying to excuse the inexcusable.

 

[Domh245]

I will reply more fully later. Those statements are not in conflict imho. As an example if a company had a bonus pot of 100,000 pounds to share out for completing a project to time and budget I would say it would be fair to share it out equally with all who participate. However, if they chose to give me a big chunk I would be absolutely delighted and go home and tell my family great news. But I would still believe it would have been fairer to share the pot out equally.

So I stand by my posts. I am over the moon and think it great news about ACB but it would have been fairer to wait until after the election.

"I think it is wrong, but because it personally benefits me I'm happy to ignore my previous statements about what would have been best"

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I'm struggling to see how any reasonable person can see that as 'great news'.

Millions of Americans - including most/all the people at the company I work for are over the moon at the moment. I guess we are not reasonable people. Fair enough.

"I think it is wrong, but because it personally benefits me I'm happy to ignore my previous statements about what would have been best"

Human nature I guess. Sorry.

 

[nlogax]

ACB's confirmation in of itself doesn't concern me too much. There've always been justices of conservative and liberal bents in the Supreme Court. This is not so different to times past even if you consider ACB's stances on certain aspects of life to be somewhat hard-line and regressive. That's the nature of the SC over the years, its bias and decisions ebb and flow left and right.

What floors me is the behavior of Mitch McConnell, blocking the nomination of Scalia's replacement in 2016 because 'principles' or something, but turning full circle and enabling ACB to be ushered in just before this election so she can sway court decisions on the various legal shenanigans currently going on in swing states. It's the most desperate partisan act designed to maximise Trump's chances next week through til the College ballot deadline in mid December.

 

[najaB]

Millions of Americans - including most/all the people at the company I work for are over the moon at the moment.

That's pretty interesting - how does it come to be that a company is mostly/entirely staffed by people of right-leaning politics? Seems a little fishy to me.

It's the most desperate partisan act designed to maximise Trump's chances next week through til the College ballot deadline in mid December.

And it's also so obviously partisan and desperate. People who are that desperate are dangerous.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

There is plenty of hypocrisy on both sides - oodles of it. I really have come to the conclusion many people don’t care anymore.

That bolded statement really is misleading. Yes, of course there is some hypocrisy on the Democratic side - in politics, you invariably see a bit of hypocrisy on all sides. But Trump and the Republicans have taken it to a whole new level, which is way beyond anything that would have been normal a few years ago, and way beyond anything the Democrats can be accused of. As an example, look at this analysis of one of Trump's recent speeches. The red in this graphic shows the parts of his speech that were untrue. Eyeballing it, I'd say that's about 1/4 of the time he was talking.

Two minutes and 28 seconds into a campaign rally on a recent Saturday night in Janesville, Wis., President Trump delivered his first lie.

(snip)

Over the course of the next 87 minutes, the president made another 130 false or inaccurate statements. Many were entirely made up. Others were casual misstatements of simple facts, some clearly intended to mislead. He lied about his own record and that of his opponent. He made wild exaggerations that violate even the pliable limits of standard political hyperbole.

That is nothing like Joe Biden or the Democrats. Yes of course Biden sometimes makes misleading statements (as do most people in politics), but Trump is off the scale in terms of routinely and repeatedly outright lying. The two sides really aren't remotely comparable. I'd seriously urge you to stop pretending that they are.

 

[Typhoon]

That's not correct. The American public vote for their State's electors, who in turn vote separately for President and Vice President. It is entirely possible (and did happen in 1796) for the President and Vice President to be from different parties.

In 1796 they had a different voting system

Under the system in place prior to the 1804 ratification of the Twelfth Amendment, electors were to cast votes for two persons for president; the runner-up in the presidential race was elected vice-president. If no candidate won votes from a majority of the Electoral College, the House of Representatives would hold a contingent election to select the winner. Each party intended to manipulate the results by having some of their electors cast one vote for the intended presidential candidate and one vote for somebody besides the intended vice-presidential candidate, leaving their vice-presidential candidate a few votes shy of their presidential candidate.

What is more likely to lead to the President and Vice President being from different parties is the number of electoral votes for Biden and Trump are the same, then the House of Representatives (currently Democrat) elects the President and the Senate (currently Republican) elects the Vice President. What might also make life more difficult is if Electoral College nominees switch sides which, given recent events, might happen (it did in 2016 but had no effect - this might be closer).

Quote from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1796_United_States_presidential_election but details checked with other websites.

 

[najaB]

In 1796 they had a different voting system

Indeed, they did. I was just making the point that the general public doesn't directly elect the President or Vice-President, it's the Electors who do. And, while unlikely, it is theoretically possible for the Electors to cast their votes differently for the two posts.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

That's pretty interesting - how does it come to be that a company is mostly/entirely staffed by people of right-leaning politics? Seems a little fishy to me.

I assume because here in Dalton, GA, The Carpet Capital of the world, if you look at the demographics whites are in a slight minority. Hispanics are in the majority and the vast majority are family people (with larger families) who mainly hold to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church where the official teaching is abortion is bad and hated.

Now of course I have grossly over simplified but that is one reason (possibly). I have had loads of texts overnight from friends in Utah and Missouri expressing wild delight at ACBs elevation to SCOTUS.

Now perhaps because the owner, the CEO, the CFO, the plant manager, the VP Operations and myself as Technical Director and my colleague as Technical Director of our sister company are all conservatives , some others may suppress their views is a possibility I am willing to acknowledge.

BTW - every boss I have had in my 20 years living in the USA has been a strong republican. Three of them were/are huge financial donors too. Perhaps also, sub conciously I could not work for a left wing boss and therefore (un)knowingly choose and accept jobs from conservative bosses.

 

[najaB]

But Trump and the Republicans have taken it to a whole new level, which is way beyond anything that would have been normal a few years ago, and way beyond anything the Democrats can be accused of.

Including examples such as:

• Trump criticised Obama for playing too much golf. Obama had 308 golf outings in eight years, Trump is up to 283 in his first term (Source: Trump Golf Count)
• The GOP criticised the Clintons for enriching themselves through the Clinton Foundation, but have said nothing about the fact that the Trump Foundation was closed after it was found to be breaking the law and that the Trump family used money from the foundation for personal expenses
• The GOP and Trump made a big deal about the security implications of Hillary Clinton (as Secretary of State) using a private mail server ("Lock her up!"), but say nothing about the fact that the President repeatedly refused (refuses?) to stop using his personal iPhone
• The GOP launched repeated investigations (ten in total) into Hillary Clinton and the raid on the US Embassy in Benghazi (all of which found that she had done nothing wrong), yet have done everything in their power to obstruct a full investigation into the actions of Russia in the 2016 election and the interaction with members of the Trump campaign (despite numerous guilty pleas by those involved)
• The GOP accused Obama of raising the deficit and ballooning the national debt but the deficit was actually falling under Obama after rising massively in 2008 (thanks to the inherited broken economy from Bush), the Trump Tax Cuts and massively increased discretionary spending are expected to add at least $1T to the national debt (Source: USASpending.gov)

 

[Typhoon]

Indeed, they did. I was just making the point that the general public doesn't directly elect the President or Vice-President, it's the Electors who do. And, while unlikely, it is theoretically possible for the Electors to cast their votes differently for the two posts.

Seven Electors successfully voted differently to what was expected of them in the last election. So it is certainly credible that this time at least one of the four candidates may not achieve the numbers of votes expected of them. With every sign that it is likely to be a tight election, this might be crucial.

 

[najaB]

BTW - every boss I have had in my 20 years living in the USA has been a strong republican. Three of them were/are huge financial donors too.

That's not surprising. Owners of large businesses are more likely to be fiscally conservative than to have progressive views.

Perhaps also, sub conciously I could not work for a left wing boss and therefore (un)knowingly choose and accept jobs from conservative bosses.

That's entirely possible.

 

[edwin_m]

Now perhaps because the owner, the CEO, the CFO, the plant manager, the VP Operations and myself as Technical Director and my colleague as Technical Director of our sister company are all conservatives , some others may suppress their views is a possibility I am willing to acknowledge.

I suspect this member may work in the oil industry.

 

[Typhoon]

I suspect this member may work in the oil industry.

From post #405 I thought it was the carpet industry

Dalton is often referred to as the "Carpet Capital of the World,"home to over 150 carpet plants. The industry employs more than 30,000 people in the Whitfield County area. More than 90% of the functional carpet produced in the world today is made within a 65-mile (105 km) radius of the city.

. It is also the birthplace of Mrs Trump, mark II.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I suspect this member may work in the oil industry.

Not correct I am afraid.

From post #405 I thought it was the carpet industry . It is also the birthplace of Mrs Trump, mark II.

Correct. We make chemicals - many of which are used in carpet production but we are branching out and now sell stuff to construction related industries. Floor Coatings etc.

As for Marla Maples aka Mrs Trump II and mother of Tiffany Trump you are correct. Lived and raised about 5 miles north of where I live and went to high school in Tunnel Hill also about 4 miles north of where I live. Born in one of the Dalton hospitals.

 

[najaB]

Correct. We make chemicals - many of which are used in carpet production but we are branching out and now sell stuff to construction related industries.

I suspect then, that it's not entirely incorrect to say that you work in the petrochemical industry, unless you use non petroleum-derived feed materials.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I suspect then, that it's not entirely incorrect to say that you work in the petrochemical industry, unless you use non petroleum-derived feed materials.

Oh absolutely. It is one reason I am an electrification of railways etc fan. Petrochemical/Oil is such a useful commodity for making so many things including plastics/polymers etc. It upsets me that the stuff is "wasted" (ok probably too strong a term) by literally burning it. A huge quantity but not all of the feedstocks we use are petroleum derived - I would estimate a little over 60%. Probably worth its own thread sometime.

OT ps I see you are from Scotland @najaB - My son in law was born in Girvan Ayrshire. My uncle was born in Glasgow and although my aunt who married my unlce was from Preston she lived in Penicuick Midlothian for about 65 years. They both taught at George Herriott School in Edinburgh. My uncle taught engineering mathematics mainly. He wrote a book on mathematics too. No longer in print though I dont think.

 

[oldman]

They both taught at George Herriott School in Edinburgh.

They would have been appalled by your spelling - it's Heriot.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

They would have been appalled by your spelling - it's Heriot.

Touché.

 

[gbbub321]

Trump must surely be the worst president the Unites States has ever had. He has made the US a laughing stock around the world and made America more divided and fractious than ever. His bellicose rhetoric, vicious personal attacks, blatant lying are only matched by his overwhelming incompetence, especially in tackling the vital issues of the day such as Covid19 and the environment; all the while allowing his very rich friends to become ever more wealthy at the expense of the poorest in society.

I try to convince myself that the American people won't re-elect this egotistical buffoon as their president and thus doom themselves and the rest of the world to another four years, allowing him to create even more havoc. But then I realise this is America that I'm talking about.

His core supporters will of course vote for him and a large proportion of Republicans would rather die than vote Democrat, but perhaps some may abstain. Reports of the deliberate running down of the US Postal Service are worrying, along with the lack of US government effort to prevent a repeat of Russian interference in the election. I fear the level of smears, faked news stories and misinformation by the Trump team and their friends on the far right will be greatly intensified and I suspect this election will become the dirtiest and most morally repugnant in American history.

In 2016 Trump lost the public vote but was elected due to the bizarre workings of the US Electoral College, could it happen again? What do you think the outcome of the 2020 election will be?

And what exactly is the connection of this to the railway

 

[kermit]

And what exactly is the connection of this to the railway

Hi there! I thought maybe you were joking, then I saw that you had just joined, so you probably hadn't realised - this little bit of the forum is for non-railway stuff. Though railways do have a way of creeping in to some discussions, nonetheless!

 

[gbbub321]

Hi there! I thought maybe you were joking, then I saw that you had just joined, so you probably hadn't realised - this little bit of the forum is for non-railway stuff. Though railways do have a way of creeping in to some discussions, nonetheless!

Sir, my apologies

 

[kermit]

Sir, my apologies

Absolutely no apology needed, welcome to the Forum, and the sometimes interestingly different slant on world events that people (hmmm... we're overwhelmingly male people, aren't we?) with an interest in railways provide!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Absolutely no apology needed, welcome to the Forum, and the sometimes interestingly different slant on world events that people (hmmm... we're overwhelmingly male people, aren't we?) with an interest in railways provide!

Sir, my apologies

May I add my welcome too.