Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 118

Thread: What If Trump Loses In 2020 And Refuses To Accept The Results Or Leave Office?

  1. #76 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,920
    Thanks
    1,067
    Thanked 5,762 Times in 4,511 Posts
    Groans
    297
    Groaned 185 Times in 181 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    "(CNN)President Donald Trump's critics are increasingly focused on the question of which Democrat will challenge him for the presidency in 2020. It's an important question, but another one might be even more important: Regardless of who runs in 2020, if Trump loses, will he leave the Oval Office peacefully?

    Let's start with why we need to ask this question: Trump is increasingly proving himself to be a President eager to overstep his authority. Just last week, Trump displayed his willingness to invoke unprecedented presidential power to declare a national emergency utterly without justification. This week has brought a startling report from the New York Times that, for the past two years, Trump has tried to undermine the investigations by Special Counsel Robert Mueller and other parts of the Justice Department in order to, in the words of the Times, "make the president's many legal problems go away." In light of these overreaching assertions of his own authority, it's at least plausible that Trump might attempt to cling to power in ways previously unimaginable by an American president.

    Thankfully, there are four steps that key actors across the American system of governance can take to get ahead of this possibility.

    Remember, when Trump was merely a private citizen running for President in 2016, he became the first presidential candidate in recent memory to refuse to commit that he'd honor the results of the election if he lost. Now, he occupies the Oval Office. He's the commander in chief of the most powerful military on Earth. If he even hints at contesting the election result in 2020, as he suggested he might in 2016, he'd be doing so not as an outsider but as a leader with the vast resources of the US government potentially at his disposal.
    Trump's unrelenting assaults on the media and intelligence community, augmented by his baseless insistence on widespread voter fraud, have laid the groundwork for him to contest the election results in worrisome ways by undermining two institutions Americans would count on to validate those results.

    As the 2018 midterms approached, Trump appeared to preview exactly such behavior. He tweeted that he was "very concerned that Russia will be fighting very hard to have an impact on the upcoming Election" and "pushing very hard for the Democrats." Without pointing to even a shred of analysis from the intelligence community, media reports or any other sources, Trump seemed to dangle the notion that, if the elections went too badly for the Republicans, he might allege foreign interference with the vote tally to cast doubt on the validity of the results.
    In 2020, with his reelection on the line, the stakes for Trump himself are, of course, wildly bigger.
    All told, there's real reason to worry here. So, what can be done now to avoid a potential constitutional crisis and ensure that the 2020 election results -- whatever they might be -- are respected and that any transfer of power occurs peacefully?
    While many of us worry that President Trump has fallen woefully short in addressing foreign election interference through social media that can change American voters' minds, there's nonetheless an obvious imperative to respect the actual vote tally unless the intelligence community indicates that malicious actors have directly altered it (which would be unprecedented). Thankfully, there are four key sets of governmental actors across the United States that can commit now to certain steps that would help to isolate President Trump should he refuse to hand over power peacefully.

    First is ... " (click the link to read more)

    What if Trump refuses to accept defeat in 2020?
    There is as much chance of that happening as those who claimed Obama was going to declare martial law and cancel the 2016 election--alarmists.

  2. #77 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,447
    Thanks
    23,965
    Thanked 19,108 Times in 13,083 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello Flash,

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    There is as much chance of that happening as those who claimed Obama was going to declare martial law and cancel the 2016 election--alarmists.
    I hope you're right, hope I'm wrong, but I see a MUCH higher chance of Trump trying to pull a fast one to discredit the election if he loses. If it goes against him he is against it. He has both wanted to get rid of the electoral college and praised it depending on which year and which candidate. And his favorite thing to do is challenge things in court. He already managed to stonewall Congress and refuse to cooperate and they realized they could do nothing because he could just keep dragging the court battle out past the 2020 election that this impeachment is intended to protect.

    If we really wanted to get to the bottom of the impeachment we need to hear from Trump under oath, Giuliani, Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo, Perry, Pence, OMB, all of them under oath.

    Why would somebody who won't cooperate with the Constitution honor an election he doesn't like? He has no honor. He has no class.

    He doesn't see barriers. He looks at legal barriers and says 'how can I get around it?
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  3. The Following User Groans At PoliTalker For This Awful Post:

    PostmodernProphet (12-13-2019)

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to PoliTalker For This Post:

    ThatOwlWoman (12-13-2019)

  5. #78 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    9,090
    Thanks
    3,487
    Thanked 3,433 Times in 2,367 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 888 Times in 802 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    After his defeat in 2020

    Picture1.jpg

  6. #79 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,447
    Thanks
    23,965
    Thanked 19,108 Times in 13,083 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello jimmymccready,

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmymccready View Post
    After his defeat in 2020

    Picture1.jpg
    Precisely.

    Which is why it not only needs to be a defeat, but it has to be a resounding one. Total drubbing. So bad he can't call it into question. Maybe Bloomberg will be the one. I know nothing about him, but already several people have mentioned him to me. I need to learn more.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  7. #80 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    9,090
    Thanks
    3,487
    Thanked 3,433 Times in 2,367 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 888 Times in 802 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello jimmymccready,



    Precisely.

    Which is why it not only needs to be a defeat, but it has to be a resounding one. Total drubbing. So bad he can't call it into question. Maybe Bloomberg will be the one. I know nothing about him, but already several people have mentioned him to me. I need to learn more.
    I agree but an ill-formed impulse of conservatism and populism opposed to internationalism is sweeping the world as evidenced by Johnson's victory in UK yesterday.

    The future is unknowable, so all we can do now is work as hard as we can for the world we want now.
    Last edited by jimmymccready; 12-13-2019 at 09:35 AM.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jimmymccready For This Post:

    PoliTalker (12-13-2019), ThatOwlWoman (12-13-2019)

  9. #81 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,597
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StoneByStone View Post
    Calm down, I know what I'm saying isn't what you want to hear, but getting angry won't help.
    who's angry?

    Quote Originally Posted by StoneByStone View Post
    When the Republicans decide to not remove Trump, do you honestly believe that these veterans are going to rise up and overthrow Trump?
    do you honestly believe that all those 'militia' people are right wing conservatives? if so, you need to stop watching the fake news BS. There are more of us that are constitutionalists, not republicans or democrats.

    Quote Originally Posted by StoneByStone View Post
    Have you not been watching the hearings? There are still Democrats fighting for democratic elections.
    if you're talking about schiff or nadler, you're deluded.
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  10. #82 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,597
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Maybe Bloomberg will be the one. I know nothing about him, but already several people have mentioned him to me. I need to learn more.
    Bloomberg is an anti gun republican turned anti gun democrat. A Billionaire intent on buying a presidency to implement his antigun big government objective.
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  11. #83 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Hooterville by the sea
    Posts
    23,334
    Thanks
    6,344
    Thanked 16,632 Times in 11,620 Posts
    Groans
    1,236
    Groaned 513 Times in 483 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    "(CNN)President Donald Trump's critics are increasingly focused on the question of which Democrat will challenge him for the presidency in 2020. It's an important question, but another one might be even more important: Regardless of who runs in 2020, if Trump loses, will he leave the Oval Office peacefully?

    Let's start with why we need to ask this question: Trump is increasingly proving himself to be a President eager to overstep his authority. Just last week, Trump displayed his willingness to invoke unprecedented presidential power to declare a national emergency utterly without justification. This week has brought a startling report from the New York Times that, for the past two years, Trump has tried to undermine the investigations by Special Counsel Robert Mueller and other parts of the Justice Department in order to, in the words of the Times, "make the president's many legal problems go away." In light of these overreaching assertions of his own authority, it's at least plausible that Trump might attempt to cling to power in ways previously unimaginable by an American president.

    Thankfully, there are four steps that key actors across the American system of governance can take to get ahead of this possibility.

    Remember, when Trump was merely a private citizen running for President in 2016, he became the first presidential candidate in recent memory to refuse to commit that he'd honor the results of the election if he lost. Now, he occupies the Oval Office. He's the commander in chief of the most powerful military on Earth. If he even hints at contesting the election result in 2020, as he suggested he might in 2016, he'd be doing so not as an outsider but as a leader with the vast resources of the US government potentially at his disposal.
    Trump's unrelenting assaults on the media and intelligence community, augmented by his baseless insistence on widespread voter fraud, have laid the groundwork for him to contest the election results in worrisome ways by undermining two institutions Americans would count on to validate those results.

    As the 2018 midterms approached, Trump appeared to preview exactly such behavior. He tweeted that he was "very concerned that Russia will be fighting very hard to have an impact on the upcoming Election" and "pushing very hard for the Democrats." Without pointing to even a shred of analysis from the intelligence community, media reports or any other sources, Trump seemed to dangle the notion that, if the elections went too badly for the Republicans, he might allege foreign interference with the vote tally to cast doubt on the validity of the results.
    In 2020, with his reelection on the line, the stakes for Trump himself are, of course, wildly bigger.
    All told, there's real reason to worry here. So, what can be done now to avoid a potential constitutional crisis and ensure that the 2020 election results -- whatever they might be -- are respected and that any transfer of power occurs peacefully?
    While many of us worry that President Trump has fallen woefully short in addressing foreign election interference through social media that can change American voters' minds, there's nonetheless an obvious imperative to respect the actual vote tally unless the intelligence community indicates that malicious actors have directly altered it (which would be unprecedented). Thankfully, there are four key sets of governmental actors across the United States that can commit now to certain steps that would help to isolate President Trump should he refuse to hand over power peacefully.

    First is ... " (click the link to read more)

    What if Trump refuses to accept defeat in 2020?
    What if pigs could fly you would be covered in pig shit.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Eagle_Eye For This Post:

    FastLane (12-13-2019)

  13. #84 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Ravenhenge in the Northwoods
    Posts
    89,080
    Thanks
    147,008
    Thanked 83,429 Times in 53,293 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 4,661 Times in 4,380 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Yeah. I remember that. But none of those Presidents were extremists. Trump is.
    In the case of the prior three presidents, I think the speculation about "he won't leave when his time is up" was more a product of disgruntled and bored ppl looking to stir up some drama among equally-bored ppl. In TRE45ON's case though, due to his routine flaunting of law and convention, it starts to take on an air of plausibility, eh?
    "Conservatism is the blind and fear-filled worship of dead radicals." -- Mark Twain

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to ThatOwlWoman For This Post:

    PoliTalker (12-16-2019)

  15. #85 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    11,056
    Thanks
    4,929
    Thanked 3,685 Times in 2,733 Posts
    Groans
    6
    Groaned 707 Times in 647 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nordberg View Post
    They honored the system. Trump does not. Even Nixon supplied the information the impeachment committee demanded Trump will not. They all honored subpoenas, Trump does not. Clinton testified under oath. Trump will not.
    Trump has said he thinks he should have more than 2 terms. No other president has said that since terms were limited.
    Correct!

    that's just cawacky lying as usual.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to TTQ64 For This Post:

    jimmymccready (12-13-2019)

  17. #86 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    11,036
    Thanks
    6,682
    Thanked 3,860 Times in 3,139 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 124 Times in 122 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    I give it a probability of zero percent that Donald Trump will hunker down in the white house
    You're making up numbers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    after - AGAIN - losing the popular vote
    Irrelevant. Not how Presidents are elected.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    and this time hypothetically losing the EC in 2020.
    This MUST happen in order for Trump to lose. The EC is how Presidents are elected.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    I think the overwhelming preponderance of evidence is that Donald Trump is a coward, who is full of bluster, but always quick to fold in the end.
    You're making shit up again.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    I still marvel at the claim he made that he would keep the government shut down for years if the Democrats didn't cave on giving him his border wall.
    So?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    There is no threat Donald Trump can make that should be believed.

    Donald Trump is one in a long line of weak cowards who are quick to puff themselves up, but just as quick to fold.
    You're making shit up again.

  18. #87 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,597
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatOwlWoman View Post
    In the case of the prior three presidents, I think the speculation about "he won't leave when his time is up" was more a product of disgruntled and bored ppl looking to stir up some drama among equally-bored ppl. In TRE45ON's case though, due to his routine flaunting of law and convention, it starts to take on an air of plausibility, eh?
    well, that's bullshit. During Bush's first term and after the PATRIOT ACT passed, most of the liberals were all about GW/Cheney police state, gulags for liberals, suspended elections............etc. there was no 'boredom' in politics after 9/11
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  19. #88 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    9,090
    Thanks
    3,487
    Thanked 3,433 Times in 2,367 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 888 Times in 802 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Anybody placing faith in the 'militia' has the mind of those who believe in pixies and gnomes.

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jimmymccready For This Post:

    PoliTalker (12-16-2019), ThatOwlWoman (12-13-2019)

  21. #89 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,597
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmymccready View Post
    Anybody placing faith in the 'militia' has the mind of those who believe in pixies and gnomes.
    so the founders believed in pixies and gnomes? they were childlike mindsets whose debates and arguments over the creation of a document defining the new federal government should be discarded because you think you 'know' better?????
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  22. #90 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    26,116
    Thanks
    694
    Thanked 5,043 Times in 3,907 Posts
    Groans
    85
    Groaned 1,697 Times in 1,555 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    who's angry?
    You are. You resorting to insults right away.


    do you honestly believe that all those 'militia' people are right wing conservatives? if so, you need to stop watching the fake news BS. There are more of us that are constitutionalists, not republicans or democrats.
    I believe it. I just don't believe that any of them are going to rise up and kick out a super corrupt president, whether that president is Republican or Democrat.
    When the Republicans vote to keep Trump after what he did, I'd be surprised if more than ten of these so-called "constitutionalists" do anything other than complain.



    if you're talking about schiff or nadler, you're deluded.
    How so?

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 308
    Last Post: 10-04-2020, 06:58 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-16-2019, 10:36 AM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-22-2019, 01:05 PM
  4. Replies: 30
    Last Post: 06-22-2019, 12:27 PM
  5. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-17-2019, 05:56 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •