I think what's making it worse is it's only happening in blue states. From recollection though, Biden only won Michigan by about 3% last time. Roughly 200,000 votes I think it was, but still, a blue state none the less. Although I think those voting for Trump are going to do so regardless and those against him definitely won't be coming out to vote for him no matter what happens. I honestly don't think he, or anyone else can shift his numbers too much.As much as I hate Trump I think things like this do more harm then good. Adds fuel to his conspiracy fueled fire. He hasn't been convicted of a crime yet. It's punishment without due process.
Agreed. Although he clearly instigated the whole thing, its a bad look to attempt to selectively ban him from certain states. Nevermind that he wouldn't have a shot at winning those states anyway.As much as I hate Trump I think things like this do more harm then good. Adds fuel to his conspiracy fueled fire. He hasn't been convicted of a crime yet. It's punishment without due process.
Interestingly, Trump apparently had COVID during the first debate with Biden; concealed it, almost as if he didn't care if Biden caught it from him.Covid was the chance.
There is no apparently about itInterestingly, Trump apparently had COVID during the first debate with Biden; concealed it, almost as if he didn't care if Biden caught it from him.
This was done to politicians of the “Confederacy” without them being convicted of anything.As much as I hate Trump I think things like this do more harm then good. Adds fuel to his conspiracy fueled fire. He hasn't been convicted of a crime yet. It's punishment without due process.
It was brought to court in Colorado by a group of Republicans. In Maine, the SoS is legal bound when a lawsuit is filed re: the 14th. Amendment to move forward with it. Not sure of the particular machinations in Illinois. Alas, it is indeed unfortunate these are all blue states.I think what's making it worse is it's only happening in blue states. From recollection though, Biden only won Michigan by about 3% last time. Roughly 200,000 votes I think it was, but still, a blue state none the less. Although I think those voting for Trump are going to do so regardless and those against him definitely won't be coming out to vote for him no matter what happens. I honestly don't think he, or anyone else can shift his numbers too much.
I think it's Biden's numbers that are looking more uncertain. The large number of undecided seems to be Democrat voters and some independents who have worries about Joe's health and ability to last another 5 years. The Israel/Gaza situation will have a factor, but I'm not certain it could be the deciding one, but that's not to say it couldn't as if it puts off 1 or 2% of Biden voters and it's a low turnout then it could have an impact. I think ensuring Democrats turn out in high numbers to vote is going to be the biggest challenge. Although I could easily be misunderstanding things, but that's how I have interpreted things from what I have been seeing and reading.
There is zero chance these rulings survive SCOTUSThis was done to politicians of the “Confederacy” without them being convicted of anything.
“Historical precedent also confirms that a criminal conviction is not required for an individual to be disqualified under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. No one who has been formally disqualified under Section 3 was charged under the criminal “rebellion or insurrection” statute (18 U.S.C. § 2383) or its predecessors.”
https://www.citizensforethics.org/r...eports/past-14th-amendment-disqualifications/
Several judges, even conservatives judges, think it qualifies, I think it’s pretty hard to argue they’re so far off.
I expect the text and email train will show a high level of coordination between the Trump camp and those looking to foment insurrection.
The US Constitution needs a serious overhaul. Neither the general election process nor the nomination of the SC judges are democratic.So, Trump probably gets to stall court cases until after the election, since the SC will delay it all by taking this case?
The house should elect judges if anything, at least in theory it is democratic, the senate largely represents empty land , not democratic at all.The US Constitution needs a serious overhaul. Neither the general election process nor the nomination of the SC judges are democratic.
Trump nominated 3 judges and has the supreme court in his pocket. It's actually a joke.
No he hasn't. They're hardly even comparable.Biden has been comfortably outperforming Trump in the primaries.
.
Biden has been comfortably outperforming Trump in the primaries. Could you point me to the undecideds who will be against Biden?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Better than only guy, the president, having this power. And it should be by a 2/3 majority.The house should elect judges if anything, at least in theory it is democratic,
Never understood that every state irrespectively of it's size and population gets the same number of senators.the senate largely represents empty land , not democratic at all.
They are unhappy with Biden's handling of the Gaza conflict. Point taken. But do they really believe by voting for Trump or not voting say all (which in the end is also a vote for Trump) things get better? If Trump wins the election, they will be in for a bad surprise.Just seeing posts like this and reports on MSNBC and CNN saying that the amount of uncommited should be a concern to Dems
It depends on what you mean by "things." Israel/Gaza itself, no. But Trump is not a wildcard, he was already president. Biden is president now and people don't approve of his presidency in general, not just Israel/Gaza.They are unhappy with Biden's handling of the Gaza conflict. Point taken. But do they really believe by voting for Trump or not voting say all (which in the end is also a vote for Trump) things get better? If Trump wins the election, they will be in for a bad surprise.
I'm not familiar with the particular situation in Michigan. I thought they were mainly Muslim protest votes to show their dissatisfaction of the handling of the Gaza conflict.It depends on what you mean by "things." Trump is not a wildcard, he was already president.
Fair enough but I thought these 100k uncommitted votes mostly came from the big Muslim population in Michigan.Biden is president now and people don't approve of his presidency in general, not just Israel/Gaza
The Arab American population in Michigan is only 225k (per census reporting) and the Muslim population is estimated to be around the same (including people who aren't of voting age). Uncommitted got 101k votes, and got at least 8% in every single county in Michigan. It's highly unlikely that it was mostly Arabs/Muslims.I'm not familiar with the particular situation in Michigan. I thought they were mainly Muslim protest votes to show their dissatisfaction of the handling of the Gaza conflict.
The issue is like I said, people disapprove of Biden in general. If you think they are both terrible/unacceptable on Israel/Gaza then you will look at other things.Trump moved the embassy to Jerusalem and is a buddy of Netanjahu. His son in law in Jewish. Do they really believe he will be the better man to resolve the crisis? Just at the disaster he left in Afghanistan after making one of his famous deals.
Yes, definitely. I'd expect a very significant share of the protest vote to also come from people on the left that actually see the Israel-Gaza situation, and the role of the US, for what it is. Many of these will be millenials.The Arab American population in Michigan is only 225k (per census reporting) and the Muslim population is estimated to be around the same (including people who aren't of voting age). Uncommitted got 101k votes, and got at least 8% in every single county in Michigan. It's highly unlikely that it was mostly Arabs/Muslims.
This is not a criticism of you, as I'm sure you simply read the argument somewhere, but the idea that "it's just Arabs who care about this" is just denial. Denial that used to be "nobody cares about this except irrelevant hippies." It is denial, from people who either support the Biden administration's handling of the Gaza conflict (and don't want to accept how unpopular their position is among Democratic voters), and from people who don't support it but were not ready to defend a genuinely unpopular and poor course of action.
I think it is about the long term. If you vote for Biden in this election you are essentially telling democrats you get the brown/Muslim people vote whatever you do. You can commit genocide against brown/Muslim people and they will still vote for you. I understand this genocide isn't the priority for most people, but for some people it is important.In theory it's a very good thing. It sends a clear message that the Biden team need to change tact or lose these voters. And potentially lose Michigan.
This primary gives a great opportunity to do this without actually electing Trump.
In my opinion, doing the same in the actual election and getting Trump back in is classic cutting off the nose to spite the face.
Economy wise you might be right but the strong western alliance will be destroyedTrump came in power before, America is still thriving compared to rest of the world. America will still be thriving after Trump's second term if it came to be
Its the third term I'm most worried about.Economy wise you might be right but the strong western alliance will be destroyed
The electoral college is awful, and is also much of the reason why turnout in elections is so low in the US, i believe.Better than only guy, the president, having this power. And it should be by a 2/3 majority.
Never understood that every state irrespectively of it's size and population gets the same number of senators.
The popular vote should decide who will be the next president and not some electors from each state optimized by gerrymandering.
Especially if a race is close like Michigan 2016, it is totally undemocratic that the winner will get all votes.
They are unhappy because the man who is asking for their votes is supporting genocide. It's a bit more serious than just a disagreement about the handling of a conflict.They are unhappy with Biden's handling of the Gaza conflict. Point taken. But do they really believe by voting for Trump or not voting say all (which in the end is also a vote for Trump) things get better? If Trump wins the election, they will be in for a bad surprise.
I tend to agree.There is zero chance these rulings survive SCOTUS
How is Biden supporting genocide?They are unhappy because the man who is asking for their votes is supporting genocide. It's a bit more serious than just a disagreement about the handling of a conflict.
This idea that supporting genocide or not is just a political disagreement is bonkers.
Politicians have to earn their votes by doing what their voters want. In this case, stopping a genocide should be an easy goal, instead the US have behaved like absolute psychopaths. If biden loses it's because he failed to behave like a human being with a tiny bit of human empathy, not because his potential voters are idiots who think trump would be better.
He could stop sending financial aid to israel, he could stop sending military equipment to israel, he could publicly criticize israel like he did with russia and could not veto UNSC resolutions asking for an immediate cease fire. He has done none of this, he has sent money, weapons and diplomatic cover, so he is supporting it.How is Biden supporting genocide?
What could Biden, or any other POTUS in that particular situation, do to prevent that genocide from happening?
Lots of stuff, but the two obvious ones would be cutting all foreign add, including the military one to Israel, and not vetoing Security Council resolutions.How is Biden supporting genocide?
What could Biden, or any other POTUS in that particular situation, do to prevent that genocide from happening?
That is not how gerrymandering works.Better than only guy, the president, having this power. And it should be by a 2/3 majority.
Never understood that every state irrespectively of it's size and population gets the same number of senators.
The popular vote should decide who will be the next president and not some electors from each state optimized by gerrymandering.
Especially if a race is close like Michigan 2016, it is totally undemocratic that the winner will get all votes.
USA is a Federation of States. That's the formal definition.Better than only guy, the president, having this power. And it should be by a 2/3 majority.
Never understood that every state irrespectively of it's size and population gets the same number of senators.
The popular vote should decide who will be the next president and not some electors from each state optimized by gerrymandering.
Especially if a race is close like Michigan 2016, it is totally undemocratic that the winner will get all votes.
He could stop sending financial aid to israel, he could stop sending military equipment to israel, he could publicly criticize israel like he did with russia and could not veto UNSC resolutions asking for an immediate cease fire. He has done none of this, he has sent money, weapons and diplomatic cover, so he is supporting it.
And what of those things would stop the genocide from happening? The financial aid and military equipment that didn't stop Russia, the public criticism or the UN resolution?Lots of stuff, but the two obvious ones would be cutting all foreign add, including the military one to Israel, and not vetoing Security Council resolutions.
And that is not saying about the possibility of Israel eventually turning away from the US if the reaction is too forceful, even after Netanyahu. It already happened with Egypt falling out with the Soviet Union back in the 1970s and eventually aligning with the US by the end of the same decade, leading to greater loss of Soviet influence in the region afterwards. What many people don't understand is that geopolitics is a 4D chess game, and that means you need to think several moves ahead of time. Netanyahu is about to be finished sooner than later, but doing anything kneejerk that would make Israel align away from the West even in the post-Netanyahu era would be a costly geopolitical move.And what of those things would stop the genocide from happening? The financial aid and military equipment that didn't stop Russia, the public criticism or the UN resolution?
What could Biden, or any other POTUS in that particular situation, do to prevent that genocide from happening?
The argument you are making is the one the Biden administration has been making, and it has not worked particularly well. His approval rating on Israel/Gaza is middling. He only has about 50% approval on the issue among Democratic party voters (see here, here). This is a man whose main skill is supposed to be his long experience in government. He should be experienced enough to sell actions on Israel/Palestine (an issue that's been ongoing for his entire career) to the public, but he can't do it.And what of those things would stop the genocide from happening? The financial aid and military equipment that didn't stop Russia, the public criticism or the UN resolution?
You could also use your statement as an argument that there isn't any (quick) fix of this conflict. Nobody in over 70 years was able to come with an agenda all involved parties will accept.He should be experienced enough to sell actions on Israel/Palestine (an issue that's been ongoing for his entire career) to the public, but he can't do it.
It's one state, Michigan, that has the most undecideds. It's not nearly as systemic nationwide. Michigan is not a mirror to the rest of the nation.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Just seeing posts like this and reports on MSNBC and CNN saying that the amount of uncommited should be a concern to Dems.
How are they not 'hardly comparable?' Biden has garnered more of a percentage of Dems than Trump has Repubs in every primary this far iirc.No he hasn't. They're hardly even comparable.