US President Joe Biden has said he is not confident there will be a peaceful transition of power if Donald Trump loses the presidential election in November.
"[Trump] means what he says, we don’t take him seriously. He means it, all this stuff about ‘if we lose it will be a bloodbath’.”
Mr Trump’s comment that it would “be a bloodbath for the country” if he loses the election, made as he was talking about the auto industry in March, triggered a wave of criticism.
The Trump campaign, however, said the comment was specifically about the auto industry and had been deliberately taken out of context. It sent a fundraising email which said Trump’s political opponents and others had been “viciously” misquoting him.
But there’s been so many.
“Dictator on day one”
“You won’t have to vote anymore”
Those are just the two off the top of my head as I’m heading back into work on my lunch break.
Everything bad Trump ever says is either “a joke” or “out of context.”
Weird how often he says things that everyone things he means and then he doesn’t mean them. I sure wouldn’t vote for a guy like that. He’s weird.
What’s even in context for him? He jumps around so much there is no context.
This is his one strength. He can dog whistle as much as he wants because he always carefully chooses his words to add some sort of plausible deniability or innocent interpretation. So his base hears what he can’t fully say out loud yet and the media has to carefully tiptoe around interpreting it or lose credibility to his base
There’s nothing carefully chosen about it. He just vomits so many words it overwhelms the brain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
Isn’t it kind of his job to make sure there is?
No. The danger here is GOP-controlled states refusing to certify a Trump loss, and the Federal government/Biden doesn’t have any power over that.
refusing to certify is one thing, and isn’t necessarily violent.
if the transition of power is not peaceful, that’s an entirely different manner, and yes Biden has the power to deal with that.
Corrupt election boards trying to throw the election to a corrupt House or corrupt SCOTUS is what causes violence.
Of course he has the power to deal with it.
But I think any sane person would hope that he isn’t put in the position to need to deal with it.
Naturally.
Refusing to certify may send it to the house, where each state gets one vote. It would be a coup
Not his job to control an unabashed pathological liar from lying… again. And not even convincingly!
Yeah.
So he just lets congress get overrun again by a violent insurrection while taking the votes. Cuz that’s not his job… no sir-e.
That’s not what I said… so… no.
I can’t control what you do just like can’t control me. It’s on Donny to control himself and not insight another potential coup. No one can force the little cry baby to act like an adult. He has to do that himself.
All Biden can do is try to mitigate the consequences of another 80 year olds tantrum
All Biden can do is try to mitigate the consequences of another 80 year olds tantrum
ultimately, when those tantrums threaten the constitutionally recognized government, then it’s Biden’s job to, you know. Defend that government. as mandated by that constitution and as he swore to do.
yes. it’s a very ugly place we’re coming to.
that’s why he’s paid the middle-bucks.
You can’t control anyone shy of putting them in prison which obviously isn’t happening. He’ll do what he can, but come on man, look what happened last time. They built gallows lol. It’s like trying to hold water, it’s uncontrollable nonsensical chaos from a whiny trust fund kid with a cult following.
He’s gunna do what he does and Biden will do his best to mitigate the tantrum.
In almost 1/4 of a century only 1 republican has won the popular vote and not even in both terms and only 1 guy refuses to admit it even after 8 years of being proven wrong.
Yes, but there’s only so much he can do. Of course there are things he can do to prepare for violence, both directly and in coordination with state governors. That said, if people want to protest, they’re going to protest. The way things are, there’s a fine line between maintaining the peace and oppression. Republicans have, for years, been laying the groundwork for the oppression argument. It’s easy to say, “who cares” to that, but if enough people think they’re being oppressed by the government, things will get more violent.
You and me both, Joe.
Gee, you think the guy who was the first president not to support a peaceful transfer of power, who tried to subvert the government by an organized mob, and who hasn’t expressed any wrongdoing at all might not be nice about it this time?
My only quibble is that the transfer of power itself will be fine, because it would be between Biden and Harris. Trump wouldn’t have any official power, and anything he and his supporters do couldn’t be interpreted as official acts.
I think Biden, being freed up and all, should spend some time fortifying the election results. I know the election is inherently flawed but there should be systems in place to stop another Jan 6th. Do some maintenance. Get commitments from the states themselves. Jus saying.
Jan 6th only happened because Trump let it happen.
If Trump wins, Biden will transfer power. Of that, I have 100% confidence.
If Trump loses, he has no authority to command government personnel, so him riling up people to storm the capitol this time will almost certainly be met with resistance.
I’m actually much more confident that nothing as bad as J6 will happen again, at least not this election cycle. I do think he needs to spend some time putting safeguards into place to prevent the abuse of the clear weakspots in our election system, namely the certification process itself being flawed if controlled by partisan sycophants.
Not as long as there are red states. Ensuring electors may be a major fuck you to the whole process
I have faith that when the lawsuits come down hard on those guys, they’ll drop their tough guy act and certify.
The supreme court is lined with heritage foundation lackies. The courts are beyond useless.
Ditch the electoral college, certify the election with a popular vote, adopt ranked choice.
But then the 1% would become the 10% and I’m sorry but that just won’t do, it’s a very nuanced system that boils down to Rich good Poor bad. /s
He can’t just change the Constitution.
I think it would be a worthwhile exercise to draft up some amendments to fix the SCOTUS and lopsided representation problems.
It won’t pass. 0% chance. But , it would serve as a blueprint of what could be if voters gave them a super majority. And a foundation for a time in the distant future if both parties could actually govern in good faith again.
And it would signal to voters that the Dems are looking to improve our government, not just cling to the status quo like many voters (here, at least) seem to think.
That’s absolutely true. However with the SCOTUS rulings as of late regarding the Executive branch, it could be fun to try.
If we ever get a trifecta again we need to kill the filibuster and then pass a law to expand Congress so the EC is effectively locked to the national result. As a bonus it seriously hurts lobbyists and gives us better representation.
what happens when we lose the trifecta?
Historically we’ve never gone backwards in the number of representatives. It would be very hard for a party with a majority in The House of Representatives to make that case.
Roll back Citizens United while we’re at it.
Ranked choice is just another way for people to game the system. I wish people understood this.
If we can only afford one candidate, they can afford 30. Ranked choice is like the very last possible thing that should be implemented in a supposed democracy. You don’t believe me, the Conservative party of Canada has ranked primaries. You have 4 crazy people and 1 moderate. Who gets more votes? The crazy people. You’re literally sealing your fate if you implement ranked voting in a mass-lobbying environment like the USA.
Nope, it works great here in Australia.
FPTP is the worst system, and couple that with a system like the electoral collage and you have a system designed to make as few voices heard as possible.
Is lobbying legal in Australia? Considering the sway the oil and gas lobby has in AU, i don’t know if your point stands. I just can’t see it helping a shitstorm like USA, when I can see it impacting Canada negatively
The goal posts, you move them sir.
That was always my point, idk what youre saying
That you’re moving the goal posts?
Ranked choice is just another way for people to game the system. I wish people understood this.
Vote for the candidate you want, and then put the moderate as your second choice, shuffle them all together and oh look the moderate got the nom, but has to campaign in such a way as to please the democratic plurality of a multi party system.
How many “crazy people” have been put forth as the Canadian Conservative Party candidate? As the general elections went in 2021, one of the most contentious in recent history, it looked like there was a plurality there. The outcome, and current scandals not withstanding within the Canadian governemnt, there aren’t assassination attempts creating articles from reputable sources giving serious credence to civil war.
Seems like a two party system might create some tribalism there, let’s look back at the Canadian Parliament, with a lot of different parties in the parliament compromising and doing politics. Looks like a lot of pluralism there.
https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/votes
Now let’s take a look at what the US Congress has been up to recently
https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/votes
Weird, outside of a universal vote to go on vacation, I don’t really see a plurality there. Mostly along a two party line.
I wonder how we got there? I bet someone smarter than I has thought of this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger's_law
Oh they did.
Moving back to the threat of political violence, which is a much larger conversation than ranked choice voting. Could a two party system contribute to that? Could other countries with a binary politcal system face the same issues?
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/rising-tide-political-violence
Huh could the very nature of a two party system, encourage political tribalism and disincentivize political collobaration?
https://voices.uchicago.edu/dangerousthoughts/2016/05/14/political-tribalism-and-identity-politics/
What does the future of the US want?
Huh, thank goodness we don’t have to deal with those pesky crazies in the Canadian Conservative Party ranked primaries.
Ranked choice is just another way for people to game the system. I wish people understood this.
I don’t see why you skip my entire point of it just increasing the number of shitty candidates. You say the “moderate” gets chosen, but what’s the mean when 4/5s of the pool is poison?
The fact you just straight to Trump-assassination whataboutism is fucked, and this whole mathematical law regarding duopoly again flies past my point. Providing more candidates that are shit only ratchets the equation towards shit. That’s not to say having more than two parties is bad… I’m saying the political foundation in America is so bad that implementing ranked choice before destroying the influence of capital only increases the chance of capital winning.
Do you know how Ranked Choice works? I explained it in a sentence. You keep agreeing with my points. The Moderate wins and has to take the 4/5ths into consideration. What you’re describing with your pool of poison is a problem with the conservative party and not with ranked choice voting. You can happily look at the voting turn out in Australia, and Australian exit polls to directly refute your point of poison.
Whatboutism? You didn’t even read my post. I’m saying that a First Past the Post voting leads to tribalism that can lead to political extremism and violence. Which is clearly illustrated in every research paper, article, and government report I shared with you.
You’ve responded with an opinion, and your opinion of one minor part of a much larger Canadian political system. Again.
More choice breeds better results for a larger portion of the population. The fact that our extremism here in America cannot even take serious root in Canada is a great point to the benefits of a pluralistic government. But sure. Whataboutism .Yeah.
It’s “whataboutism” because using a closed Republican-on-Republican violence is kind of ridiculous when you say my point about “poisoned pools” is only a problem within the Conservative party.
I’m saying ranked voting only helps when it’s backed by a legitimate and healthy political environment. One that America and Canada do not have. Man we’re just talking past eachother, cause some ignorant Aussie (you) thinks he understands American politics. Brother, I understand math, but these people can legally throw money at the literal Supreme Court and it’s completely legal. That’s not a healthy environment. Citizens United would mean every pool in the USA would be full of poison.
The Balkanization of the Republican Party is driven by political tribalism. I don’t think you have a very strong grasp on political theory or how absolutely fucked we are down here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balkanization
I’m not the person who said
Nope, it works great here in Australia.
That was @BigBoyBarry
Look at my comment history, I was born in America and have lived here all my life. I’ve voted in every primary I qualify to vote in and every presidential election since I turned 18.
You might want to read the usernames of the people you’re replying to.
This relies on the States acting in the best interest of the country as a whole, which as we have seen, has not been the case for many southern states
I think Biden, being freed up and all, should spend some time fortifying the election results.
100% agreed.
I know the election is inherently flawed
Aside from Trump and his ilk getting his ilk installed as election workers who have vowed to disrupt the election any way they can, how exactly is it “inherently” flawed? Pretty sure this way of thinking is why these people feel emboldened to question the elections. There was no inherent flaw in 2020. And every single court ruled as such.
first past the post is kinda a shitty system, it results in a two party system, which isn’t good. but to start fixing that you’d need to redo all of politics and that’s never going to happen.
Sorry, I meant the mechanics of the election isn’t inherently flawed (except in GA now where counties can just decide not to certify at will). I would agree that voting should be changed, nationwide, to ranked choice.
They may be talking about the fact that you can win the presidency with a minority of votes. They’re right about that, but the actual vote counting is pretty secure, as the courts have decided.
Yeah, that makes sense. Would 100% agree then.
He’s probably nervous regarding GOP fearmongering.
Any attempts by him to shore up security around the election will be labeled by Republicans as tampering and he probably doesn’t want to be responsible for anything to come out of that especially if he’s going into retirement after this term.
Obviously they’re going to fearmonger regarding election results anyways despite being the ones who are more than likely going to attempt to alter the results but it’d still be adding fuel to the fire that he’ll have to deal with. Don’t really need to have the entire discussion on Republicans, their lack of logic and Democrats sometimes not quite being up to the task of dealing with the dumb fuckery put forth by them.
He’ll have my utmost respect if he goes above and beyond to do this anyways though.
Biden can literally guarantee the peaceful transition of power to Harris. Whatever he chooses to do is an official act, right? So do whatever it takes to put down any bullshit, Joe.
He’s saying there’s a chance a third party tries to make it violent.
What third party are you fucking talking about? Republicans are the only ones making overt threat of violence.
Well if Harris wins it’s her and Biden in the official transfer of power. Anyone else is a third party to that.
I think this is ultimately the difference between now and 2020. The fox isn’t guarding the hen house.
Unfortunately it’s not that simple considering a lot of the fuckery is going on at state level, but hopefully
How on earth can Biden guarantee that Trump supporters won’t get violent? The one best suited to do that is Trump, and we know from past experience that he is going to do the exact opposite.
I never once said he could guarantee they won’t get violent. Does anyone read on this instance?
Does anyone read on this instance?
Maybe read what Biden said? And then you can be among those who read on this instance.
I am among them. It’s okay, I understand that comprehension is hard.
I noticed how you didn’t actually address the fact you didn’t read what he said. It’s okay, I understand that as hard as comprehension is, admitting you are wrong makes that look like a walk in the park.
What’s there to transition if he loses?
Might want the national guard on standby this time then. Dont wait for the legislators to waffle it
People fear that the person who incited a mass riot the last time they lost an election will incite a mass riot if he loses this election?
deleted by creator
None of use are, Joe. None of us.
It’s better in fact because there won’t be much of a transition. All you’re doing is giving the vice president your presidency dumbass. These old people, bro.
If the domestic terrorists attack again just put them in the ground this time. Easy peasy.
I see a lot of handwringing about this, like "Oh, even if Harris wins they’ll just attempt a coup again!"and it’s like OK, and? Your solution to them stealing an election is to let them win it legitimately instead?
Yeah, voting isn’t a magic pill that solves everything. You still gotta wake up the next day and do the work.
"Oh, even if Harris wins they’ll just attempt a coup again!"and it’s like OK, and? Your solution to them stealing an election is to let them win it legitimately instead?
My solution would have been to lock them up for trying to steal the last one.
Trump said he doesn’t need the votes which is far scarier. They need to fear the consequences of trying to steal democracy from us.
BBC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for BBC News:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
A part if me wants to see the chaos that ensues after he’s defeated. I just hope nobody dies
People will die, my friend.
Granted, I’m not president of anything at all, but I’m very confident that there will NOT be a peaceful transition if Trump loses.
Do you anticipate any violence if he wins?
If he wins, it’s open season on any and all political opponents, and any critics, really. So yes.
If he loses, it’ll be “rigged,” and they’ll try another 1/6. My prediction is they’ll try State Capitols this time around…
So, looks like violence is back on the menu, boys.
Yes, are you familiar with the fascist playbook? It’s not the first, second, or even third time this has happened in history and you can bet the people in charge know their history. First it’s the disabled, mentally ill, and queer people. Then the out crowd just keeps expanding until the whole thing collapses but a lot of people die along the way.
I am unapologetically anti-authoritarian in every way. I fear Democrats almost as much as I fear Republicans. Yes I know the playbook. Everybody has somebody they want to disenfranchise.
For sure both sides are exactly the same. I suffer from amnesia can you help me by reminding me of all those Democrat-run violent insurrections?
Yeah that’s what I said. Tool.
Another amnesia issue I’m having: can you remind me which “vermin” the Democratic nominee has vowed to “exterminate”? And also I forgot about the times she called for the use of violence. Can you jog my memory on that as well?
I would expect nationwide marches and protests but absolutely not an organized coup attempt like j6
