• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is Trump Trying to Stage a Coup?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Starbuck1975 said:
No, he is bringing legal challenges that the judiciary is dismissing due to lack of evidence and merit, as they should. That is not a coup no matter how many alarmist dummies say it is. By your logic, Al Gore also attempted a coup.
Click to expand...
Again, attempted bank robbery is still a crime. Attempting a vote change by unconstitutional means
 
Amused said:
So dishonest. Gore requested a hand recount. Something That Trump has had 4 or 5 of.

But Bush Et Al contested the hand recount that the FL supreme court ordered and the US supreme court stopped it.

If anything, the 2000 election was a bit of a judicial coup for Bush, not Gore.

But yeah. Even though you have everything backwards and you're incapable of just admitting you were mistaken, sure....
Click to expand...
I wasn’t mistaken. The example you cited was essentially a military coup. Seems like some of you are just desperate to use the term “coup”, probably why we have so many threads dedicated to the topic.
 
Starbuck1975 said:
It’s not unconstitutional to use the legal and constitutional mechanisms that are in place, and for those attempts to fail upon judicial review.
Click to expand...

Whether you want to call it a coup or not, bringing repeated legal actions which you know have no evidentiary basis in hope that some partisan judge or justices will overturn the election result is a corrupt act. Just as is calling local officials to pressure them to appoint alternative slates of electors in an election you know you lost.

So Trump is corruptly trying to overturn an American election. He isn't just exercising legal rights and since the courts smack him down, oh well, they did their job so everything is just fine now that he lost in court. It most definitely is not fine as tens of millions of Americans believe him and will continue to believe anything and everything he tells them.

Whether or not you think you're "winning" this purely semantic argument is immaterial because America is not winning. The one thing we could always count on, that no matter how much corruption and authoritarian behavior we had between elections, we could always trust the electoral process and expect a peaceful transition of power, is gone. We have been losing our democracy piece by piece and this last piece we could ill afford to lose. It is ominous precedent for the future.

So go ahead, keep on thinking you're pwning the libtards with your pyrrhic victories over word definitions while the country sinks around you. It's your prerogative to remain completely clueless about what is happening all around you.
 
woolfe9998 said:
Whether you want to call it a coup or not, bringing repeated legal actions which you know have no evidentiary basis in hope that some partisan judge or justices will overturn the election result is a corrupt act. Just as is calling local officials to pressure them to appoint alternative slates of electors in an election you know you lost.
Click to expand...
Pettiness does not a coup make. You are welcome to call it a coup. I simply disagree.

So Trump is corruptly trying to overturn an American election. He isn't just exercising legal rights and since the courts smack him down, oh well, they did their job so everything is just fine now that he lost in court. It most definitely is not fine as tens of millions of Americans believe him and will continue to believe anything and everything he tells them.
Click to expand...
Where you see a problem I see a resilient system that is functioning as designed. The nation is divided along partisan lines. There are people who believe Gore and Hillary were robbed. I expect Trumpers will believe the same.

Whether or not you think you're "winning" this purely semantic argument is immaterial because America is not winning. The one thing we could always count on, that no matter how much corruption and authoritarian behavior we had between elections, we could always trust the electoral process and expect a peaceful transition of power, is gone. We have been losing our democracy piece by piece and this last piece we could ill afford to lose. It is ominous precedent for the future.
Click to expand...
Yet Trump is in the position he is in because the pieces you acknowledge were taken have been rationalized and defended. Trump is the net result.

So go ahead, keep on thinking you're pwning the libtards with your pyrrhic victories over word definitions while the country sinks around you. It's your prerogative to remain completely clueless about what is happening all around you.
Click to expand...
Not trying to pwn anyone, I simply reject the premise of the argument. It seems that some other posters are the ones quite desperate to “pwn” someone, how childish. I am quite aware of what’s happening around me, I just don’t share your perspective on it. I thought this was a political forum.
 
Starbuck1975 said:
Pettiness does not a coup make. You are welcome to call it a coup. I simply disagree.
Click to expand...

I disclaimed any position in your semantic argument which was quite clear in my post. It's just not that important whether you call this a coup, an attempted coup, or a corrupt attempt to overturn a legitimate election. Since you knew I had disclaimed any interest in your semantic pre-occupation, the above comment is a straw man.

Yet the fact you put this all down to "pettiness" proves my point. You have your head firmly stuck in the sand.

Where you see a problem I see a resilient system that is functioning as designed. The nation is divided along partisan lines. There are people who believe Gore and Hillary were robbed. I expect Trumpers will believe the same.
Click to expand...

I'll take your 400th "both sides" false analogy for $100, Alex. That election was down to 500 votes in a single state and all the dems wanted was a recount, which I'm sure any sane person at this junction would agree they were entitled to. Just as no one opposed Trump getting recounts in WI or GA this year. No one claimed a vast voter fraud conspiracy. Dems have never claimed any such thing, ever.

Yet Trump is in the position he is in because the pieces you acknowledge were taken have been rationalized and defended. Trump is the net result.

Not trying to pwn anyone, I simply reject the premise of the argument. It seems that some other posters are the ones quite desperate to “pwn” someone, how childish. I am quite aware of what’s happening around me, I just don’t share your perspective on it. I thought this was a political forum.
Click to expand...

Yes, you're entitled to believe that America is just moving forward business as usual. And I'm entitled to point out how deeply wrong you are, and also that the reason you're wrong is a bias toward the belief that both sides are more or the less the same in their behavior, which is factually wrong, as illustrated, for example, by the weakness of the analogy you just made with the 2000 election.

Why you think I'm arguing that you're not entitled to an opinion is beyond me.
 
Starbuck1975 said:
Pettiness does not a coup make. You are welcome to call it a coup. I simply disagree.

Where you see a problem I see a resilient system that is functioning as designed. The nation is divided along partisan lines. There are people who believe Gore and Hillary were robbed. I expect Trumpers will believe the same.

Yet Trump is in the position he is in because the pieces you acknowledge were taken have been rationalized and defended. Trump is the net result.

Not trying to pwn anyone, I simply reject the premise of the argument. It seems that some other posters are the ones quite desperate to “pwn” someone, how childish. I am quite aware of what’s happening around me, I just don’t share your perspective on it. I thought this was a political forum.
Click to expand...

What is legal/lawful and who decides that in regards to a coup? Let's game it out. If the Supreme Court had heard the Texas suit as it was plead(ridiculous arguments and no evidence) and agreed with Texas's position on a 5-4 vote, overturned the election and made Trump the winner. Would you consider what happened legal? And would you consider what happened a coup?

2nd scenario. Trump convinced the legislatures in enough states to hold special elections to appoint a new slate of electors to guarantee Trump the election. The courts held that nothing was wrong with that. Would that be legal? And would that be a coup?
 
As was quoted by Alfred in the Dark Knight

"Some men just want to watch the world Burn".

This pretty much sums up Trump. he cares not for anyone but himself and screw the rest of the country until he gets what he wants If the US ne4eds to go down in a smouldering heap to justify his petty needs, he doesn't care.

We need him and all of his followers gone...
 
woolfe9998 said:
I disclaimed any position in your semantic argument which was quite clear in my post. It's just not that important whether you call this a coup, and attempted coup, or a corrupt attempt to overturn a legitimate election. Since you knew I had disclaimed any interest in your semantic pre-occupation, the above comment is a straw man.

Yet the fact you put this all down to "pettiness" proves my point. You have your head firmly stuck in the sand.
Click to expand...
Words have meaning. Let’s call it a sandwich.


I'll take your 400th "both sides" false analogy for $100, Alex. That election was down to 500 votes in a single state and all the dems wanted was a recount, which I'm sure any sane person at this junction would agree they were entitled to. Just as no one opposed Trump getting recounts in WI or GA this year. No one claimed a vast voter fraud conspiracy. Dems have never claimed any such thing, ever.
Click to expand...
Yes, Gore was entitled to a recount, just as Trump is...and there are Democrat voters who refuse to accept that Gore and Clinton lost, they don’t claim conspiracy, but are no less irrational in their reasoning because they were emotionally vested in the outcome...or do you not remember all the “Resist” and “Not My President” nonsense.

Yes, you're entitled to believe that America is just moving forward business as usual. And I'm entitled to point out how deeply wrong you are, and also that the reason you're wrong is a bias toward the belief that both sides are more or the less the same in their behavior, which is factually wrong, as illustrated, for example, by the weakness of the analogy you just made with the 2000 election.
Click to expand...
And I am entitled to point out that your dismissal of my analogy is born of your own confirmation bias.

Why you think I'm arguing that you're not entitled to an opinion is beyond me
Click to expand...
Because you are so concerned by it. I think you’re an intelligent poster, but we don’t often agree, yet I don’t recall ever feeling the need to tell you that you are wrong for not sharing my perspective.
 
Starbuck1975 said:
It’s not unconstitutional to use the legal and constitutional mechanisms that are in place, and for those attempts to fail upon judicial review.
Click to expand...
That vote change would have been unconstitutional. Again attempted bank robbery. Legal to own a gun. Not legal to use it to rob a bank. Even if unsuccessful still a crime.
 
emperus said:
What is legal/lawful and who decides that in regards to a coup? Let's game it out. If the Supreme Court had heard the Texas suit as it was plead(ridiculous arguments and no evidence) and agreed with Texas's position on a 5-4 vote, overturned the election and made Trump the winner. Would you consider what happened legal? And would you consider what happened a coup?
Click to expand...
Not a coup and unfortunately legal. I didn’t consider it a coup when the judiciary kept Trump’s executive authority in check. The scenario you mentioned assumes that the majority write an opinion backing up their decision. Because I have faith in SCOTUS, I can’t envision your scenario as being remotely plausible.

2nd scenario. Trump convinced the legislatures in enough states to hold special elections to appoint a new slate of electors to guarantee Trump the election. The courts held that nothing was wrong with that. Would that be legal? And would that be a coup?
Click to expand...
Trump coercing state legislatures would be illegal but not a coup, but again not a scenario I see as plausible, especially given that this scenario did not play out once.
 
Starbuck1975 said:
Not a coup and unfortunately legal. I didn’t consider it a coup when the judiciary kept Trump’s executive authority in check. The scenario you mentioned assumes that the majority write an opinion backing up their decision. Because I have faith in SCOTUS, I can’t envision your scenario as being remotely plausible.

Trump coercing state legislatures would be illegal but not a coup, but again not a scenario I see as plausible, especially given that this scenario did not play out once.
Click to expand...
Now we have reached the ‘he’s trying to take power illegally but it’s not a coup’. level of Starbuck stupidity.
 
Starbuck1975 said:
Not a coup and unfortunately legal. I didn’t consider it a coup when the judiciary kept Trump’s executive authority in check. The scenario you mentioned assumes that the majority write an opinion backing up their decision. Because I have faith in SCOTUS, I can’t envision your scenario as being remotely plausible.

Trump coercing state legislatures would be illegal but not a coup, but again not a scenario I see as plausible, especially given that this scenario did not play out once.
Click to expand...
Well, yours is a problem of imagination (esp. given all we've seen here). It's not about faith in the goodness of a branch, this thread was about an attempt. When the President joined that case he thought that somehow (maybe because the Justices owed him allegence ) they would grant him his relief. (And to be truthful, that brief was so trash, it was akin to submitting a blank piece of paper and basically asking the Supreme Court to overturn an election based on that blank piece of paper). The fact that they didn't doesn't change the fact that the President tried it.

And as to the 2nd example, why would you consider it illegal if the courts said it was legal? Legality is given based on what courts decide right?
 
Starbuck1975 said:
Not a coup and unfortunately legal. I didn’t consider it a coup when the judiciary kept Trump’s executive authority in check. The scenario you mentioned assumes that the majority write an opinion backing up their decision. Because I have faith in SCOTUS, I can’t envision your scenario as being remotely plausible.

Trump coercing state legislatures would be illegal but not a coup, but again not a scenario I see as plausible, especially given that this scenario did not play out once.
Click to expand...
You need to step back and not just focus on the lawsuits. You don't have to have a single law suit to create a coup. Look at what he has done with various private meetings with legislation officials, both at state level and federal level in an attempt to persuade them into disregarding the law, the constitution, the will of the people in an attempt to over turn the elections and have those state legislators choose the electoral in his favor. He is already planning on meddling in the Congress's counting of those Electoral in another attempt to over turn a legal election. You also have to look at all the lies and conspiracy crap he is spewing on twitter, campaign media, and other areas. But you have to first admit that he is lying to even accept he is doing it. Sedition is illegal, a criminal act that is a felony. He has convinced 126 republican officials to join or back the Texas unconstitutional lawsuit, that the SCOTUS threw out. So look at the big picture and stop ignoring the many illegal acts he is committing, and are being supported by a fair amount of Republican's, including you because you are sitting here trying to defend a falsehood of it not being a coup.
 
emperus said:
Well, yours is a problem of imagination (esp. given all we've seen here). It's not about faith in the goodness of a branch, this thread was about an attempt. When the President joined that case he thought that somehow (maybe because the Justices owed him allegence ) they would grant him his relief. The fact that they didn't doesn't change the fact that the President tried it.
Click to expand...
Yes he tried it and it failed. Doesn’t make it a coup. Perhaps your imagination has become fear and paranoia after a healthy dose of liberal doomsday scenarios that simply never materialized.

And as to the 2nd example, why would you consider it illegal if the courts said it was legal? Legality is given based on what courts decide right?
Click to expand...
You’re second scenario assumes an electoral override through executive coercion. Guess its my lack of hysterical imagination.
 
NWRMidnight said:
You need to step back and not just focus on the lawsuits. You don't have to have a single law suit to create a coup. Look at what he has done with various private meetings with legislation officials, both at state level and federal level in an attempt to persuade them into disregarding the law, the constitution, the will of the people in an attempt to over turn the elections and have those state legislators choose the electoral in his favor. He is already planning on meddling in the Congress's counting of those Electoral in another attempt to over turn a legal election. You also have to look at all the lies and conspiracy crap he is spewing on twitter, campaign media, and other areas. But you have to first admit that he is lying to even accept he is doing it. Sedition is illegal, a criminal act that is a felony. He has convinced 126 republican officials to join or back the Texas unconstitutional lawsuit, that the SCOTUS threw out. So look at the big picture and stop ignoring the many illegal acts he is committing, and are being supported by a fair amount of Republican's, including you because you are sitting here trying to defend a falsehood of it not being a coup.
Click to expand...
You can believe its a coup, I just happen to disagree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top