The Trump Presidency

[jfb]

If ever there was an indication that ignorance of how the system works is rife in the US, I can't think of a better example than the notion that the Vice President has the power to overturn the election results. Do they really believe that an elected official would have the ultimate deciding power over the outcome of an election that determines his own office?!

[snip]

I know what you mean. Today I had an exchange like this with someone of whom it might be said of him The Trump Is Strong In Him. (Either that or he's a troll - a truly colossal troll, as he's been promoting ideas like this for years.)

Him: Pence has the power to reject EC votes that are disputed.

Me: Where's this power stated?

Him: The Constitution.

Me: Where in the Constitution?

Him: You look it up.

Me: [quoting references from the Constitution] It doesn't say that anywhere. Did I miss anything?

Him: Yes, you missed the bit where other people, including the President, say he has this power.

And then you ask the follow-on questions - so if the VP has the power to toss electoral votes, why didn't Biden toss the votes for Trump in '17 (because there were definitely shenanigans in that election)?  Why didn't Gore proclaim himself President in 2001?  Or Quayle in '93, or Mondale in '81?   

And on and on and on. 

People who claim to be the most passionate defenders of the Constitution tend to be the most profoundly ignorant of what it says. 

[Jeff Raven]

And then you ask the follow-on questions - so if the VP has the power to toss electoral votes, why didn't Biden toss the votes for Trump in '17 (because there were definitely shenanigans in that election)?  Why didn't Gore proclaim himself President in 2001?  Or Quayle in '93, or Mondale in '81?   

And on and on and on. 

People who claim to be the most passionate defenders of the Constitution tend to be the most profoundly ignorant of what it says.

It's no different from people who believe in the flat Earth, think space isn't real, or deny the Moon landings, but try to refer to the laws of thermodynamics and motion (and get both the numbers and the language wrong).  They pick and choose what they refer to, or, as is usually the case, just mindlessly parrot what they've heard others who "know the truth" say.

[Jeff Raven]

I wonder what the true believers of the Trump conspiracies would say if I asked them why it is that in the early evening last night (I think around 8pm) both Democrats were comfortably ahead of their opponents (around 1.5-3%), but when I checked before I turned in, all of a sudden the races were much tighter, and one was a virtual deadlock.  Where did all of those votes come from?  How did the Republicans suddenly 'find enough' to catch up to the Democrats?

Do you think they would get the irony?

[gillianren]

People who claim to be the most passionate defenders of the Constitution tend to be the most profoundly ignorant of what it says. 

My go-to example is the guy I talked to who demanded to know when they put "a well-regulated militia" in the Second Amendment.  He really, really didn't like my answer.

[jfb]

People who claim to be the most passionate defenders of the Constitution tend to be the most profoundly ignorant of what it says. 

My go-to example is the guy I talked to who demanded to know when they put "a well-regulated militia" in the Second Amendment.  He really, really didn't like my answer.

Yeah, 2nd Amendment fundamentalists are a special breed of stupid. 

I mean, I'm not anti-gun - I own a couple (both hand-me-downs from my grandfathers, one a hunting rifle and the other a .38 police revolver), although I haven't fired either one in almost two decades.  I've actually considered signing up for a CCL, not because I intend to carry¹ but more because I wouldn't put it past the TX Lege to make a CCL the only valid ID for voting (especially after this go-round). 

But, dammit, the right isn't absolute, and the language of the 2nd Amendment makes it clear (to me, anyway) that it's talking about bearing arms in service of protecting the state, not the individual. 

^{1. Although the events of the last few weeks are making me re-think that.} 

[JayUtah]

Do they really believe that an elected official would have the ultimate deciding power over the outcome of an election that determines his own office?!

Cough, Brian Kemp of Georgia, cough.

[M]easures that made it easier for everyone to vote made it harder for Republicans to win...

That's not the only example or even the worst example of Republicans tipping their hand to show that all the "election security" measures they advocate are nothing more than racially-motivated voter-suppression tactics.  They maintain this narrative that without such measures, all elections would be stolen by ililegal immigrants voting fraudulently in droves for Democrats.  They maintain this with nothing more convincing that Trump's "everyone knows" rhetoric, which obviously isn't original to him.  But that's why they brazenly link Republican success at the polls to measures that make it harder to vote.  They equate "harder to vote" with "catching widespread (nonexistent) fraud."

On the plus side I did enjoy Scotland's First Minister utterly ridiculing the suggestion that Trump might visit his golf course in Scotland instead of attending Biden's inauguration yesterday. We're not letting anyone from the US into the UK at all, and we're in lockdown, so Trump can board any plane he likes but it won't be coming here.

Word on the street is that he doesn't want to be in the United States when his term ends, because he fears being arrested on the spot.  Probably a real fear.  At least after a certain time on Jan. 20, there's at least one plane he won't be able to board anymore.

[LunarOrbit]

And then you ask the follow-on questions - so if the VP has the power to toss electoral votes, why didn't Biden toss the votes for Trump in '17 (because there were definitely shenanigans in that election)?  Why didn't Gore proclaim himself President in 2001?  Or Quayle in '93, or Mondale in '81?   

And on and on and on. 

People who claim to be the most passionate defenders of the Constitution tend to be the most profoundly ignorant of what it says. 

It's ridiculous. The people whose names are on the ballots should not be allowed to pick the winner. That should be obvious to everyone, but apparently it isn't. If people in power are allowed to overrule the voters then why bother having an election in the first place?

There is a coup being attempted at this very moment in Washington DC, and it was encouraged by Donald Trump. I want the people who thought I was overreacting when I sounded the alarm about Donald Trump for four years to tell me I was wrong to do so.

[JayUtah]

Regarding ignorance of the Constitution, laws, and practices of the country, I don't think it's willful ignorance.  Or even apathy.  I think some such people genuinely feel that they're "woke" and fully informed -- perhaps better informed -- than those around them.  This is because those people feed themselves on a steady diet of daytime talk radio, Fox News (at least formerly), and the various other far-right news outlets that have been mentioned.  It's one thing to declare hopefully that the Constitution must support your belief, because your belief seems logical and reasonable to you and therefore external authority probably agrees.  But it's another thing to hear someone in a suit and tie on television, who appears very knowledgeable and important, tell you that the Constitution says this or that even if its largely a fabrication.  Tell enough people repeatedly that the Vice President has the constitutional authority to declare the winner of the election, and they'll accept it as an article of faith and think themselves well-educated for believing it.

[JayUtah]

It's ridiculous. The people whose names are on the ballots should not be allowed to pick the winner.

Or, in my opinion, have anything to do with the operation of the election.  I mentioned Kemp in Georgia, who ran the election that resulted in his winning the Governor's office in a tight election.  The new Governor of my state was the Lt. Governor and supervisor of the election in which he ran.  In his case, though, the outcome was all but assured.  And he delegated the supervision of canvassing to a deputy, unlike Kemp.

There is a coup being attempted at this very moment in Washington DC, and it was encouraged by Donald Trump.

Sad to say this is literally true.  Congress has gone into recess and the Capitol is locked down because of pro-Trump protesters having gained entrance.  There is video of the Confederate flag being waved by people outside the Senate chamber.  This is surreal.

[Zakalwe]

The Munich Beer Hall Putsch is in full swing, US style.  Remember though, "protesters" not "terrorists"

[Zakalwe]

[LionKing]

He is going to scream and jump like an overpampered baby but he knows that "facts are stubborn things", more so than him..
His supporters and him are  two sides of the same coin

[Peter B]

In case anyone is interested, the Australian ABC is live-blogging events in Washington:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-07/us-politics-live-updates-donald-trump-protests-washington/13037080

[Obviousman]

There is a coup being attempted at this very moment in Washington DC, and it was encouraged by Donald Trump. I want the people who thought I was overreacting when I sounded the alarm about Donald Trump for four years to tell me I was wrong to do so.

I don't believe you were wrong. I think he is an American Hitler.

[Obviousman]

The Munich Beer Hall Putsch is in full swing, US style.  Remember though, "protesters" not "terrorists"

Agree.