• 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.

Poll: 50% of repubs would support Trump postponing 2020 election!

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Atreus21 said:
Ah, so you're okay with suspending democracy, as the OP put it, to keep the guy you want.

I guess it's only tribalism when it's the other guy huh?
Click to expand...
Not quite the same. Everyone wants their candidate to win or be elected to a third term. Well maybe not GWB. Trump people want to suspend the election so the vote can be rigged in their favor.
 
zinfamous said:
wtf is wrong with you? are you this fucking stupid? show me where I approved of or justified this in those comments?

show me.

now.
Click to expand...

Well I mean I suppose you could look literally on this same page. All you have to do is scroll up. But anyway here:
zinfamous said:
I believe that was also true for a majority of independents as well as a significant percentage of republicans during, and certainly after the general election.

I mean honestly ask yourself: How would Obama be worse than this diseased embarrassment that is currently shitting in the Oval office?
Click to expand...

zinfamous said:
I only suggested that well over half the country supported a democracy-suspending situation that would clearly keep this country stable; as opposed to the loud, uninformed niche rabble that supports the democracy-suspending situation that would and will utterly destroy this republic, if not the world.
Click to expand...
 
Atreus21 said:
Well I mean I suppose you could look literally on this same page. All you have to do is scroll up. But anyway here:
Click to expand...

great, you copy-pasted exactly what I said as if that is tacit proof of your interpretation of what I said. Your challenge is to show me where I endorsed the opinions--the suspension of democracy for either reason--expressed in the one poll compared to the other. Show me.

I know conservatives are challenged when it comes to critical thinking and contextual analysis (that whole: "them academics are ruining my life!" thing), but try not to overheat. This task is simple.

..or is it that you remain a Trump supporter, to this day? That would explain the problems you are having here.
 
HomerJS said:
Not quite the same. Everyone wants their candidate to win or be elected to a third term. Well maybe not GWB. Trump people want to suspend the election so the vote can be rigged in their favor.
Click to expand...

Have a look at woolfe's first two posts in this thread.

woolfe9998 said:
It's all about the tribe. Screw democracy, right?
Click to expand...

woolfe9998 said:
This is far more than a matter of being dumb to vote for Trump. It's a matter of being willing to tolerate suspending elections in order to keep your tribe in power. It's much worse than mere, garden variety stupidity. This is fascism in the making, happening right now, in real time, in these United States of America, circa 2017.
Click to expand...

It's only partisanship, tribalism, and fascism when Republicans do it. Jesus Christ.

If you're going to throw around the "tribalism" accusation, you need to be sensitive to it on your own side. Do you really think that Democrats are less subject to team-worship and partisanship than Republicans?

I don't excuse any Republican who wants to postpone the 2020 election. You shouldn't excuse the same behavior from Democrats. Coming to a simple agreement on that is the one thing that would reduce partisanship and tribalism.
 
zinfamous said:
great, you copy-pasted exactly what I said as if that is tacit proof of your interpretation of what I said. Your challenge is to show me where I endorsed the opinions--the suspension of democracy for either reason--expressed in the one poll compared to the other. Show me.
Click to expand...

Spare me the silly insults so that I don't have to keep omitting them from my responses.

I said you justified it, or at least rationalized when democrats do something very similar. You clearly did that. Exactly what a republican would do under the exact same circumstances.
 
Wishing/hoping a president could serve a 3rd term is different from changing election rules to ENSURE that happens isn't it?
I'm not even American but I would also rather have Obama as president than Trump, but alas that is against the rules, and I wouldn't want to change that rule, as it can be very useful if you have a wannabe dictator in power.
 
Atreus21 said:
Spare me the silly insults so that I don't have to keep omitting them from my responses.

I said you justified it, or at least rationalized when democrats do something very similar. You clearly did that. Exactly what a republican would do under the exact same circumstances.
Click to expand...

Jealous that Smobliskat took his title. ^
 
Jhhnn said:
Not necessarily. Postponing the election isn't something that's ever really been discussed so their inclination towards team ball takes over. It's a stupid question in the first place.
Click to expand...

Lets hope for your sake there's a union for water boys.
 
Atreus21 said:
Spare me the silly insults so that I don't have to keep omitting them from my responses.

I said you justified it, or at least rationalized when democrats do something very similar. You clearly did that. Exactly what a republican would do under the exact same circumstances.
Click to expand...

Legal measures to change how many terms a president can serve is hugely different than the president deciding to delay an election, which would explicitly violate the constitution.

I agree that tribalism is something both parties display (although not in remotely equal amounts as shown in plenty of other cases), but these two things are not the same.

Also can anyone really say at this point that we wouldn't have been better off with a third term of Obama, an actually competent president? I mean even the hardest core republican has to know in their heart this is a shit show.
 
fskimospy said:
Legal measures to change how many terms a president can serve is hugely different than the president deciding to delay an election, which would explicitly violate the constitution.
Click to expand...

Both of them are radical departures from the norm for strictly partisan reasons that clearly merit the same criticism leveled by the OP.

I agree that tribalism is something both parties display (although not in remotely equal amounts as shown in plenty of other cases), but these two things are not the same.
Click to expand...

What other cases?
 
Atreus21 said:
Both of them are radical departures from the norm for strictly partisan reasons that clearly merit the same criticism leveled by the OP.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. One is a legal way for a president to continue in office and one is an illegal way. They are night and day.

What other cases?
Click to expand...

Syrian intervention is a good example. When Obama proposed striking Syria Republicans were overwhelmingly opposed. 22% for. When Trump wanted to do it? 86% for. Democratic opinion remained basically unchanged.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...e-attack-on-syria-they-hated-under-obama.html

Now that's a pretty striking difference in tribalism wouldn't you say?
 
fskimospy said:
Absolutely not. One is a legal way for a president to continue in office and one is an illegal way. They are night and day.



Syrian intervention is a good example. When Obama proposed striking Syria Republicans were overwhelmingly opposed. 22% for. When Trump wanted to do it? 86% for. Democratic opinion remained basically unchanged.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...e-attack-on-syria-they-hated-under-obama.html

Now that's a pretty striking difference in tribalism wouldn't you say?
Click to expand...

In a poll taken right after the Access Hollywood tape was released last October, 72% of white evangelicals had decided that personal immorality didn't disqualify one from public office, versus 32% who held that opinion in 2011. Other religious groups increased on that score, but to a lesser extent. Religiously unaffiliated stayed the same.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixg...vangelicals-to-change-their-tune-on-morality/
 
Last edited:
woolfe9998 said:
In a poll taken right after the Access Hollywood rape was released last October, 72% of white evangelicals had decided that personal immorality didn't disqualify one from public office, versus 32% who held that opinion in 2011. Other religious groups increased on that score, but to a lesser extent. Religiously unaffiliated stayed the same.

https://www.prri.org/research/prri-...ics-election-clinton-double-digit-lead-trump/
Click to expand...
Acts 6:9 - And the Lord hath commanded, lest ye risk damnation, grab a pussy.
 
fskimospy said:
Also can anyone really say at this point that we wouldn't have been better off with a third term of Obama, an actually competent president? I mean even the hardest core republican has to know in their heart this is a shit show.
Click to expand...

See, the problem was that Obama wasn't concerned with Making America Great Again, and a 3rd term would've surely destroyed what was left of America, causing Repubs to die from strokes/seizures en masse.

Think about the poor conservatives that suffered for eight grueling, arduous years!
 
woolfe9998 said:
In a poll taken right after the Access Hollywood tape was released last October, 72% of white evangelicals had decided that personal immorality didn't disqualify one from public office, versus 32% who held that opinion in 2011. Other religious groups increased on that score, but to a lesser extent. Religiously unaffiliated stayed the same.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixg...vangelicals-to-change-their-tune-on-morality/
Click to expand...

That's another good one and frankly one that is a far better example. Evangelical christians have made personal morality a fundamental part of what they claim is important in politics for decades. As soon as that supposed bedrock principle conflicted with tribal loyalties most of them threw it overboard.
 
fskimospy said:
That's another good one and frankly one that is a far better example. Evangelical christians have made personal morality a fundamental part of what they claim is important in politics for decades. As soon as that supposed bedrock principle conflicted with tribal loyalties most of them threw it overboard.
Click to expand...

Yup. Anyone still remember when the GOP called itself the party of "family values"? This was the era of the Falwell and the Moral Majority, Ralph Reed and the Christian Coalition. It never meant a damn thing. Family values was a hook for Christian conservatives, but they've become so tribalistic, it isn't even needed anymore.
 
Evangelicals have been conditioned to place one issue above all others, the issue of abortion. They're on a Crusade. When Trump said he'd give them a SCOTUS that would overturn Roe v Wade all other considerations were cast aside.

Never mind that there's no scriptural basis for their zeal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top