(09-18-2024 12:41 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 12:30 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 12:06 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 11:51 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 11:25 AM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  Can you point to where I said they shouldn't have the "right" to invalidate their primary process?

I simply asked if it was anti-democratic. Is it the right thing to do? Can you cede the moral high ground when a group unilaterally decides to remove the candidate who garnered the most votes and install someone else?

I have zero problem with *any* private group selecting any officer of that group, or any candidate that they may sponsor, in whatever manner they as a group deem proper.

If there is a state or Federal law as to that selection, that law must be abided with. Same for state or Federal Constitution.

Elections to office (as opposed to selection of candidates) should absolutely be within the confines of the law and the Constitution. Telling or asking your VP to simply ignore the electoral slates, certified under the law, and outside of the bounds of the Constitution is a wholly different galaxy than a private organization making *their* choice for being *their* candidate.

Quote:Also, your statement that Biden ceded power on his own merit is not accurate according to reports. They were going to use the 25th Amendment to force him out if he didn't do what they asked.

According to most reports the 25th wasn’t an issue. In most accounts, the harsh news to Biden that he was on a path to electoral defeat, and not by a small margin, was sufficient. Not at first, but eventually the tale of numbers didn’t change.

Harsh? Yes. Was it the will of the party? I would say undoubtedly that at this time you would be hard pressed to find someone lamenting that action within the D party. And that is the underlying dynamic with private groups of all sorts.

I’ve been in a position to see first hand the dynamics of these situations —- when a CEO, founder, or full board has been co-opted. It’s the function of a private group, acting for the advantage of that group in the short, medium, or long term.

Sorry, I’m not losing sleep over the internal functioning of a private group as much as you might I that regard.

You keep evading the question though. I’m arguing against your hypocrisy on this particular statement of “… the electoral process for choosing the President,” which you only single out Trump.

Nobody is discussing about the right of a private group doing whatever it wants. Nobody cares about that. The main story here is Democrat party leadership coerced the winner of the primaries (where people actually voted) to step aside. Then instead of pivoting to a quick replacement primary or vote, they promote “their” candidate. That is the definition of undemocratic in every conceivable way.

It’s probably why the “concern for democracy” issue is only polling at 3% out of all the non-economic issues.

And that difference is probably why Trump is being prosecuted for those items, and why (pick your cast member of these supposed party elites) will almost assuredly not be.

How a private group picks their candidate is not a fundamental stricture of the Constitutional order in selecting a President.

Trump absolutely tried to interfere in that Constitutional process. Showing a blatant disregard for that Constitution in the process. And as such, earning on a fair basis the moniker 'a threat to democracy'. Literally *the* democracy guaranteed in the Constitution.

Go on about all you want on how a private group picks their candidate is an equivalent -- go right ahead. Fairly much not on point, but nothing there to stop you in that attempt at an equivalence.

It’s worth reminding you that this portion of the discussion was based on something you posted. Your entire focus is on the legality of what the DNC is allowed to do, and mine is about how hypocritical the DNC is about how they decide to select their candidate. Not sure why that can’t be some agreement there.

Imagine if Trump lost the primaries bigly but the RNC decided to make him the nominee anyway. Do you think that would fly with the media?

My stance is that the RNC would be free to whatever the RNC thinks is their best path and interest. Period.

I dont know how that 'would fly with the media'. I think it highly presumptuous to make assertions on non-events and hypotheticals.

Quote:I’ve already agreed what Trump did violate the constitutional process and norms, so I’m not sure what else I can say to further agree with you. I have since then given reasons why I think that issue will not persist or stay relevant if he wins this election.

And I dont think that hiring a person who has been shown to try to embezzle in a previous tenure as a bank CFO for a repeat stint in the office of the CFO is really a good idea.

(09-18-2024 12:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  My stance is that the RNC would be free to whatever the RNC thinks is their best path and interest. Period.

I dont know how that 'would fly with the media'. I think it highly presumptuous to make assertions on non-events and hypotheticals.

Quote:I’ve already agreed what Trump did violate the constitutional process and norms, so I’m not sure what else I can say to further agree with you. I have since then given reasons why I think that issue will not persist or stay relevant if he wins this election.

And I dont think that hiring a person who has been shown to try to embezzle in a previous tenure as a bank CFO for a repeat stint in the office of the CFO is really a good idea.

That is a legally consistent position which is understandable and I agree with that.

There is an argument to be made that rigging a primary/ignoring voters is infinitely worse than what Trump did leading up to J6. Especially if done repeatedly over time. At least there was a system in place to end "stop the steal." It was DOA.

The main distinction are the voters have no protections from the elites or the party apparatus. Their values can be completely ignored. This would lead to a very troubling path. The entire point of a primary is to find the right candidate that best represents those voter's values.

I get that these are two separate conversations, but just throwing that out there.

(09-18-2024 11:11 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 11:08 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  The Democrats threw out the votes of all 50 states when they forced Joe to step down after he won the Democratic Party's primary by a landslide. How many votes did Kamala have?

Yes, how dare a private group select their candidate as they see fit. Amazing equivalence.

The actions that Trump engaged in explicitly **** on the provisions of the Constitution, and the electoral process for the 7 states within that Constitutional definition and framework. Yes, that was a threat to democracy. Absolutely.

Perhaps show me the constitutional requirement on how parties (private groups) choose candidates for their party?

Do you even hear yourself before you come on here trying to appear to be clever and witty? "How dare a private group select their candidate as they see fit".
Since you're obviously new to all of this .... THAT'S WHAT THE DEMOCRATIC DEBATES AND THE INDIVIDUAL STATE'S CAUCASES AND PRIMARIES WERE FOR!

A political party isn't a "private group". 14,000,000+ people that voted for Biden in the primary would like you to know that. Amazing how you simply ignore the will of millions of people there for the good of what you call a small "private group". #HYPOCRITE

Just to give you an awkward chance, who are the members (as you see it) of the Democratic (private group) Party?

Democrats will just have the elites select their candidates going forward. They will basically become the Green Party.

(09-18-2024 02:03 PM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 11:11 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 11:08 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  The Democrats threw out the votes of all 50 states when they forced Joe to step down after he won the Democratic Party's primary by a landslide. How many votes did Kamala have?

Yes, how dare a private group select their candidate as they see fit. Amazing equivalence.

The actions that Trump engaged in explicitly **** on the provisions of the Constitution, and the electoral process for the 7 states within that Constitutional definition and framework. Yes, that was a threat to democracy. Absolutely.

Perhaps show me the constitutional requirement on how parties (private groups) choose candidates for their party?

Do you even hear yourself before you come on here trying to appear to be clever and witty? "How dare a private group select their candidate as they see fit".
Since you're obviously new to all of this .... THAT'S WHAT THE DEMOCRATIC DEBATES AND THE INDIVIDUAL STATE'S CAUCASES AND PRIMARIES WERE FOR!

A political party isn't a "private group". 14,000,000+ people that voted for Biden in the primary would like you to know that. Amazing how you simply ignore the will of millions of people there for the good of what you call a small "private group". #HYPOCRITE

Just to give you an awkward chance, who are the members (as you see it) of the Democratic (private group) Party?

Hate to tell you -- it is a private group. Just like the Republican party is. With leadership roles, bylaws, and all the rest. Just like a 10 member HOA. They even have to file a tax return as a group. Are you not aware of that?

Do you think its a bunch of schmoes hanging around chanting 'well golly gee willikers, we are Democrats" kind of all willy nilly in nature?

Yeah. The DNC and RNC are just like an HOA.

#savedemocracy

(09-18-2024 08:00 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(09-17-2024 03:54 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(09-16-2024 12:24 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-16-2024 12:19 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(09-16-2024 12:11 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  Based on what this loser said in court today about his limited finances, how the heck was he living in Hawaii? Hawaii has the highest cost of living in the US and one of the highest in the world.

He was a builder. Most likely got paid by non-profits to build homeless housing. He built "tiny homes".

He also said in court he only made about $3K a month. And a piece I read said he was working in Hawaii "mostly as a handyman." And his GF's house doesn't look like much in the photo I saw.

Yet he supposedly spent 6 months in Ukraine, and he flew from Hawaii to Florida to try to kill Trump?

Something isn't adding up.

And where he get the AK?

Put that in the carry-on from Hawai'i?

not sure about that. Backpacks of ceramic tiles as well?

nope. Not buying this ish (again) at all. This goes waaaaaay deeper.

Sad.

You can fly an unloaded firearm in checked in a locked case, and some amount of ammunition in original boxes or plastic ammo boxes.

Or you could go to a gun store and just buy one with your driver license after landing.

An AK-47?

(09-18-2024 03:03 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  Yeah. The DNC and RNC are just like an HOA.

#savedemocracy

Think about it a bit. It might just sink in.

(09-18-2024 04:21 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 03:03 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  Yeah. The DNC and RNC are just like an HOA.

#savedemocracy

Think about it a bit. It might just sink in.

Oh, I've thought about it.

Thanks for another day filled with laughter! Your intellectual prowess is something to behold.

(09-18-2024 04:18 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 08:00 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(09-17-2024 03:54 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(09-16-2024 12:24 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-16-2024 12:19 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  He was a builder. Most likely got paid by non-profits to build homeless housing. He built "tiny homes".

He also said in court he only made about $3K a month. And a piece I read said he was working in Hawaii "mostly as a handyman." And his GF's house doesn't look like much in the photo I saw.

Yet he supposedly spent 6 months in Ukraine, and he flew from Hawaii to Florida to try to kill Trump?

Something isn't adding up.

And where he get the AK?

Put that in the carry-on from Hawai'i?

not sure about that. Backpacks of ceramic tiles as well?

nope. Not buying this ish (again) at all. This goes waaaaaay deeper.

Sad.

You can fly an unloaded firearm in checked in a locked case, and some amount of ammunition in original boxes or plastic ammo boxes.

Or you could go to a gun store and just buy one with your driver license after landing.

An AK-47?

Yes to both.

(09-18-2024 04:52 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 04:18 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 08:00 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(09-17-2024 03:54 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(09-16-2024 12:24 PM)TripleA Wrote:  He also said in court he only made about $3K a month. And a piece I read said he was working in Hawaii "mostly as a handyman." And his GF's house doesn't look like much in the photo I saw.

Yet he supposedly spent 6 months in Ukraine, and he flew from Hawaii to Florida to try to kill Trump?

Something isn't adding up.

And where he get the AK?

Put that in the carry-on from Hawai'i?

not sure about that. Backpacks of ceramic tiles as well?

nope. Not buying this ish (again) at all. This goes waaaaaay deeper.

Sad.

You can fly an unloaded firearm in checked in a locked case, and some amount of ammunition in original boxes or plastic ammo boxes.

Or you could go to a gun store and just buy one with your driver license after landing.

An AK-47?

Yes to both.

Problem is that the shooter had serious dings on his record that *should* have dinged him on the ATF insta-check system.

Good grief, he had previously been popped for having an illegal full auto..... and the indictment charges him as being a felon in possession.

(09-18-2024 04:54 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 04:52 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 04:18 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 08:00 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(09-17-2024 03:54 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  And where he get the AK?

Put that in the carry-on from Hawai'i?

not sure about that. Backpacks of ceramic tiles as well?

nope. Not buying this ish (again) at all. This goes waaaaaay deeper.

Sad.

You can fly an unloaded firearm in checked in a locked case, and some amount of ammunition in original boxes or plastic ammo boxes.

Or you could go to a gun store and just buy one with your driver license after landing.

An AK-47?

Yes to both.

Problem is that the shooter had serious dings on his record that *should* have dinged him on the ATF insta-check system.

Good grief, he had previously been popped for having an illegal full auto..... and the indictment charges him as being a felon in possession.

The rifle he had looked to be an SKS “bubba special” so may be a private party / gun show private party sale.

"Biden willingly ceded that right to someone else."

I spit water on my keyboard. That's twice today!

(09-18-2024 10:53 PM)TripleA Wrote:  "Biden willingly ceded that right to someone else."

I spit water on my keyboard. That's twice today!

Care to enlighten us with your plethora of first hand insights? Or just dissemble with the best of them.....

(09-18-2024 10:56 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 10:53 PM)TripleA Wrote:  "Biden willingly ceded that right to someone else."

I spit water on my keyboard. That's twice today!

Care to enlighten us with your plethora of first hand insights? Or just dissemble with the best of them.....

Sure. You said that, of course. Word for word.

Talk about dissembling.

Kindly explain the process that allowed Biden to "willingly cede the right to" run for president to Kamala Harris. Willingly? Not the least bit of coercion by anybody else? Not the least bit of sadness, regret or anger on Biden's part, or on the part of his family?

You don't really believe that.

(09-19-2024 01:26 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 10:56 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 10:53 PM)TripleA Wrote:  "Biden willingly ceded that right to someone else."

I spit water on my keyboard. That's twice today!

Care to enlighten us with your plethora of first hand insights? Or just dissemble with the best of them.....

Sure. You said that, of course. Word for word.

Talk about dissembling.

Kindly explain the process that allowed Biden to "willingly cede the right to" run for president to Kamala Harris. Willingly? Not the least bit of coercion by anybody else? Not the least bit of sadness, regret or anger on Biden's part, or on the part of his family?

You don't really believe that.

No, the liberals really do believe that. But consider the source. They’re the same people who believed following arrows taped on the floor at the grocery store while wearing a face diaper would save them from Covid

(09-18-2024 11:12 AM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 11:11 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 11:07 AM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 11:04 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 11:02 AM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  The line of “Trump **** on the constitution” would have more meaning if the last 45 guys didn’t all do it too.

It’s as if history only began in 2017 and everything before that was hunky dory.

How about 'Trump **** on the electoral process for choosing the President.' Better?

Sure. Now do 2024.

Yes, how dare a private group select their candidate as they see fit. Amazing equivalence.

To your previous comment that 'the rest of the 45 did it' -- To be precise, there is a *world* of difference between shitting on a bedrock principle of the transition of power, and whether some paragraph in an EO dealing with funding for moth research exceeded authority.

So to be clear, a group of party elites invalidating their own primaries isn’t anti-democratic? You’re going to die on that hill?

that's kinda how they did it until the 60s or maybe even 70s. The primary votes like we have now were non-binding, more like a guide for those at the convention.

(09-19-2024 01:26 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 10:56 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-18-2024 10:53 PM)TripleA Wrote:  "Biden willingly ceded that right to someone else."

I spit water on my keyboard. That's twice today!

Care to enlighten us with your plethora of first hand insights? Or just dissemble with the best of them.....

Sure. You said that, of course. Word for word.

Talk about dissembling.

Kindly explain the process that allowed Biden to "willingly cede the right to" run for president to Kamala Harris. Willingly? Not the least bit of coercion by anybody else?

You don't really believe that.

First, I would suggest that a willing decision may or may not include an amount of coercion.

I decide to pay taxes to the IRS, with the full knowledge that there is a coercive path that can be taken otherwise.

To your point "not the least bit of coercion" -- I would say that there probably was some involved. It absolutely is 'coercion' to go to the sitting President and say 'Bud, you are going to lose. Maybe get blown out. When you do, your name and legacy are going to be absolute mud.'

I have zero doubt that at least the above happened. Maybe even more pressure. At the end, he was not ignomiously removed in the manner that, say, Kruschev was. At the end, it was clearly his decision.

Quote:Not the least bit of sadness, regret or anger on Biden's part, or on the part of his family?

There probably was. May not have been the happiest decision of his life. Sometimes willing choices are hard choices. I dont see how the amount of 'sadness, regret or anger' plays into that.

The issue was, at the end, was it very well appears to be his decision. Albeit not an easy or a happy one.

Quote:And while it has been my intention to seek reelection, I believe it is in the best interest of my party and the country for me to stand down and to focus solely on fulfilling my duties as President for the remainder of my term.

So many words...to say absolutely nothing.