I traditionally have a thread heading to the election, here we go.
Get out the popcorn for this one.
Quote
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is expected to formally announce next week he is running for president in 2024, NBC News reported Thursday, citing two sources familiar with the matter.
The governor's official entry into the Republican primary field will put him head-to-head with former President Donald Trump, the party's current frontrunner for the nomination. Trump has already spent months treating DeSantis as his primary campaign rival, thrashing him with torrents of criticism over his gubernatorial record, his political skills and his personality.
Inconvenient parts of the constitution? Like how the dems think about the electoral college? LOL
"My candidate " can't help how you and others interpret and distorted his words".
Right. Until the "era of Trump" congress never "dug up dirt" around an election because "they aren't supposed to". Are you serous? What? What? Is disingenuous now?
Mkay.....looool
I don't see a connection between Trump's statement about the constitution and how the dems think about the electoral college. Maybe you can elaborate on that deflection. Except that maybe the EC has been "inconvenient" in that the popular vote didn't translate into an election victory.
Anyway, I think what Trump said in the past is was TMB is referring to that he wanted to terminate parts of the constitution to overturn the election results that he lost. Perhaps it was a bit blown up.
Trump said "A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,"
The implication is that the current system allowed for this massive fraud, which he still hasn't been able to prove.
Trump later said:
"The Fake News is actually trying to convince the American People that I said I wanted to 'terminate' the Constitution. This is simply more DISINFORMATION & LIES, just like RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA, and all of their other HOAXES & SCAMS,”
It is not the job of Congress to dig up dirt. They can investigate what they think might be wrong doing and perhaps that's a grey area. Even you can admit their inquiries into Minnesota politics is interesting.
I don't see a connection between Trump's statement about the constitution and how the dems think about the electoral college. Maybe you can elaborate on that deflection. Except that maybe the EC has been "inconvenient" in that the popular vote didn't translate into an election victory.
Anyway, I think what Trump said in the past is was TMB is referring to that he wanted to terminate parts of the constitution to overturn the election results that he lost. Perhaps it was a bit blown up.
Trump said "A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,"
The implication is that the current system allowed for this massive fraud, which he still hasn't been able to prove.
Trump later said:
"The Fake News is actually trying to convince the American People that I said I wanted to 'terminate' the Constitution. This is simply more DISINFORMATION & LIES, just like RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA, and all of their other HOAXES & SCAMS,”
It is not the job of Congress to dig up dirt. They can investigate what they think might be wrong doing and perhaps that's a grey area. Even you can admit their inquiries into Minnesota politics is interesting.
No deflection at all.
Trump said he would like to end rules and regulations, even some in the constitition".
Several democrats want to end the EC, which is in the constitution.
So I guess Trump and some democrats want to "terminate the constitution"?
No but if we use the same logic, both want to "terminate the constitution ".
Interesting? Yes? Unheard of? No.
There are plenty of examples of democrats "digging up dirt" even outright attacks. Brent Kavanaugh comes to mind.
Some say some of the cases against Trump is "digging up dirt".
I'm inclined to think that nothing the conservatives are doing democrats have not done themselfs. Maybe even set a precedent.
Digging up dirt and investigating can be both. Depending on how it is spun.
We can say what Congress should do or not do all day. Unfortunately I think it an open field for both sides.
I don't see a connection between Trump's statement about the constitution and how the dems think about the electoral college. Maybe you can elaborate on that deflection. Except that maybe the EC has been "inconvenient" in that the popular vote didn't translate into an election victory.
Anyway, I think what Trump said in the past is was TMB is referring to that he wanted to terminate parts of the constitution to overturn the election results that he lost. Perhaps it was a bit blown up.
Trump said "A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,"
The implication is that the current system allowed for this massive fraud, which he still hasn't been able to prove.
Trump later said:
"The Fake News is actually trying to convince the American People that I said I wanted to 'terminate' the Constitution. This is simply more DISINFORMATION & LIES, just like RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA, and all of their other HOAXES & SCAMS,”
It is not the job of Congress to dig up dirt. They can investigate what they think might be wrong doing and perhaps that's a grey area. Even you can admit their inquiries into Minnesota politics is interesting.
Totally OT: one of my favorite things to do on AN has been to Spot the Bot. One of the things I pay attention to is the overuse of verbal bullying.
Of course, if words on a paper (articles of incorporation, for instance) constitute a person, then so does a computer-generated personality.
End of derail ...
I agree that there's a big difference between changing a part of the Constitution and just arbitrarily ditching it, or parts of it, because they've become inconvenient.
I agree that the Electoral College needs to go or be radically re-interpreted. I used to shrug off the whole discussion. I never really understood why it even existed until I learned about the negotiations that went into its creation. But the Constitution also provides for a processs to change itself. I behooves us to use it.
But, as tweety pointed out, that isn't what trump's talking about and we all know it.
Totally OT: one of my favorite things to do on AN has been to Spot the Bot. One of the things I pay attention to is the overuse of verbal bullying.
Of course, if words on a paper (articles of incorporation, for instance) constitute a person, then so does a computer-generated personality.
End of derail ...
I agree that there's a big difference between changing a part of the Constitution and just arbitrarily ditching it, or parts of it, because they've become inconvenient.
I agree that the Electoral College needs to go or be radically re-interpreted. I used to shrug off the whole discussion. I never really understood why it even existed until I learned about the negotiations that went into its creation. But the Constitution also provides for a processs to change itself. I behooves us to use it.
But, as tweety pointed out, that isn't what trump's talking about and we all know it.
What is Trump talking about?
You think he become president and end the constitution? When in the constitution it makes this impossible?
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Crusades said:
No deflection at all.
Trump said he would like to end rules and regulations, even some in the constitition".
Several democrats want to end the EC, which is in the constitution.
So I guess Trump and some democrats want to "terminate the constitution"?
No but if we use the same logic, both want to "terminate the constitution ".
Interesting? Yes? Unheard of? No.
There are plenty of examples of democrats "digging up dirt" even outright attacks. Brent Kavanaugh comes to mind.
Some say some of the cases against Trump is "digging up dirt".
I'm inclined to think that nothing the conservatives are doing democrats have not done themselfs. Maybe even set a precedent.
Digging up dirt and investigating can be both. Depending on how it is spun.
We can say what Congress should do or not do all day. Unfortunately I think it an open field for both sides.
Yeah, deflection.
Making excuses for un-American language from the guy who ALREADY TRIED TO OVERTHROW A LEGAL ELECTION and pretending that he meant something less traitorous is not patriotic.
Quote
"Do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,"
Just to be clear, in the service of an obvious lie about 2020 election fraud, Trump is asking if he should just be declared the "rightful winner" or if a new election should be held. He follows that with the claim that because of his lies about fraud that he should be able to suspend rules in the constitution which would prohibit such things.
Your logic suffers. No democrat is posting on social media or acting out about suspending or terminating parts of the constitution. Words and their meanings matter.
Kavanaugh was subjected to an expected, constitutionally required senate confirmation hearing. That's not anything like the endless House of Representative Bengazi or Hunter Biden hearings. Come on now. One of these things is not like the others.
Apparently what you think and what is actually happening in congress are two different things because that "both sides" nonsense is just not gonna get any traction in this discussion. Congress has a specific purpose and it's distressing that Trump supporters don't seem to care that republicans are weaponizing and bastardizing the House of Representatives to be nothing more than a political arm of the party controlling the majority. Distressing but not surprising in the era of Trump.
Trump said he would like to end rules and regulations, even some in the constitition".
Several democrats want to end the EC, which is in the constitution.
So I guess Trump and some democrats want to "terminate the constitution"?
No but if we use the same logic, both want to "terminate the constitution ".
Interesting? Yes? Unheard of? No.
There are plenty of examples of democrats "digging up dirt" even outright attacks. Brent Kavanaugh comes to mind.
Some say some of the cases against Trump is "digging up dirt".
I'm inclined to think that nothing the conservatives are doing democrats have not done themselfs. Maybe even set a precedent.
Digging up dirt and investigating can be both. Depending on how it is spun.
We can say what Congress should do or not do all day. Unfortunately I think it an open field for both sides.
Thanks for clarifying and I do notice that TMB was the one that brought up the EC, and even if he never said "terminate the constitution" I can see what you're saying even if the topic wasn't to compare the two but Trump.
Still, the old "but your side does it too" and "what about......" "both sides do it......" and my subsequent irritation is my issue that I haven't learned to shut up about. LOL.
Examples I've had to deal with..."I don't like how Trump lied about..." and the response is "Well what about Obamas lies, and all politicians lie don't they". I've seen the same when the subject is changed from Trump to Biden. The message is one doesn't want to talk about Trump lying about something. I'd rather be ignored.
But yes, for just about every complaint a liberal posts about a conservative, the tit for tat response can be made. Thank you next
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Crusades said:
What is Trump talking about?
You think he become president and end the constitution? When in the constitution it makes this impossible?
Come on now, you're the one who is supposed to tell us what he really meant if we're not supposed to take his words at face value. He said what he said. According to that comment the constitition is not exempt from having parts terminated if he thinks circumstances might necessitate it. You know, circumstances like when he loses an election but wants to say it was stolen and so we follow some other process that ends with him retaining power. That kind of thing. Does the constitution make that impossible?
Come on now, you're the one who is supposed to tell us what he really meant if we're not supposed to take his words at face value. He said what he said. According to that comment the constitition is not exempt from having parts terminated if he thinks circumstances might necessitate it. You know, circumstances like when he loses an election but wants to say it was stolen and so we follow some other process that ends with him retaining power. That kind of thing. Does the constitution make that impossible?
Exactly. He thought the election was fraudulent. He tried to overturn it. He could not because the laws and the constitution did not allow it.
So the "Trump will end the constitutio/steal the election" is hyperbolic fear mongering with the aim to scare stupid people into believing it.
Thanks for clarifying and I do notice that TMB was the one that brought up the EC, and even if he never said "terminate the constitution" I can see what you're saying even if the topic wasn't to compare the two but Trump.
Still, the old "but your side does it too" and "what about......" "both sides do it......" and my subsequent irritation is my issue that I haven't learned to shut up about. LOL.
Examples I've had to deal with..."I don't like how Trump lied about..." and the response is "Well what about Obamas lies, and all politicians lie don't they". I've seen the same when the subject is changed from Trump to Biden. The message is one doesn't want to talk about Trump lying about something. I'd rather be ignored.
But yes, for just about every complaint a liberal posts about a conservative, the tit for tat response can be made. Thank you next
All true.
It may seem that I'm always doing this about Trump. However I'm actually more centre. This is a left dominated forum so there isn't much decent. I find very few members that are either less bias or full on hard left here.
I often formulate my replies using the same logic and prescendent that some members use here. Some members post about Trump and Republicans and make it sound like the democrats are as pure as snow and certain political bad habits are exclusive to republicans/Trump.
Hypocrisy is my annoyance but I'm always sorry if I've annoyed you.
Making excuses for un-American language from the guy who ALREADY TRIED TO OVERTHROW A LEGAL ELECTION and pretending that he meant something less traitorous is not patriotic.
Just to be clear, in the service of an obvious lie about 2020 election fraud, Trump is asking if he should just be declared the "rightful winner" or if a new election should be held. He follows that with the claim that because of his lies about fraud that he should be able to suspend rules in the constitution which would prohibit such things.
Your logic suffers. No democrat is posting on social media or acting out about suspending or terminating parts of the constitution. Words and their meanings matter.
Kavanaugh was subjected to an expected, constitutionally required senate confirmation hearing. That's not anything like the endless House of Representative Bengazi or Hunter Biden hearings. Come on now. One of these things is not like the others.
Apparently what you think and what is actually happening in congress are two different things because that "both sides" nonsense is just not gonna get any traction in this discussion. Congress has a specific purpose and it's distressing that Trump supporters don't seem to care that republicans are weaponizing and bastardizing the House of Representatives to be nothing more than a political arm of the party controlling the majority. Distressing but not surprising in the era of Trump.
It isn't illegal to object to an election. As of yet he hasn't been convicted for interference either. Just look, democrats like to deny elections too!
I know I know. It's okay because the democrats who denied election results did it before the preferred date, it's okay to deny election results as long as it's before the certification. Hillary did it after, what's her excuse?
No, not like that at all. His exact words have been quoted for you before, which makes your remark interesting.
Yes, Trump is your candidate. He represents your values.
Do you know what the purpose of the House of Representatives involves? Hint; it's purpose is not to create political theater for a political party or agenda.
I think you are young and naive.
I think you cannot post anything without saying something like "you are young and naive" . That's like me saying I think you are old and senile.
Ad hominiem is the laziest propaganda tactic. (Degrade the person to not discuss the point).
No, not like that at all. His exact words have been quoted for you before, which makes your remark interesting.
Yes, Trump is your candidate. He represents your values.
Do you know what the purpose of the House of Representatives involves? Hint; it's purpose is not to create political theater for a political party or agenda.
I think you are young and naive.
Did you know that "political theater " wasn't invented and executed by Republicans exclusively? You truly think is is.
You seriously can not see it due to your bias and preoccupation with Trump.
Tweety, BSN, RN
36,395 Posts
I don't see a connection between Trump's statement about the constitution and how the dems think about the electoral college. Maybe you can elaborate on that deflection. Except that maybe the EC has been "inconvenient" in that the popular vote didn't translate into an election victory.
Anyway, I think what Trump said in the past is was TMB is referring to that he wanted to terminate parts of the constitution to overturn the election results that he lost. Perhaps it was a bit blown up.
Trump said "A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,"
The implication is that the current system allowed for this massive fraud, which he still hasn't been able to prove.
Trump later said:
"The Fake News is actually trying to convince the American People that I said I wanted to 'terminate' the Constitution. This is simply more DISINFORMATION & LIES, just like RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA, and all of their other HOAXES & SCAMS,”
It is not the job of Congress to dig up dirt. They can investigate what they think might be wrong doing and perhaps that's a grey area. Even you can admit their inquiries into Minnesota politics is interesting.