Trump's HBO Interview

[jason_c]

Yeah. If it's bad now, it's going to be worse for the next four years. This is a guy who says, if he loses the election it's because of corrupt mail voting fraud. If he wins? With that same mail voting? It's because he stopped the corrupt democrats who would have facilitated fraud. Republicans can be trusted to mail vote.

It's genuinely Orwellian. I thought Americans had they're laughs by voting in W. Bush. No, it actually seems he's something of a voice of reason now.

Enjoy the next term of greatness.

Mail in voting is extremely dodgy especially in today's circumstances. Not sure I'd trust the result either. Trump is certainly not talking out of his hat on the subject.

[Ms Diddles]

Mail in voting is extremely dodgy especially in today's circumstances. Not sure I'd trust the result either. Trump is certainly not talking out of his hat on the subject.

Merely out of his orange hairpiece???

Apologies, that was puerile!

[Svensson]

Mail in voting is extremely dodgy especially in today's circumstances. Not sure I'd trust the result either. Trump is certainly not talking out of his hat on the subject.

well the problem though is that he does on this occasion as he does pretty much all the time. Of course, there is no evidence that mail-in voting is ripe with fraud. There is no logic in this (several states have been doing this for years but only now does the Russian Ambassador in the White House suggest that this is all fraud). So am I talking out of my hat on this subject? No I'm not because I have facts to back me up:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53353404:
But the rate of voting fraud overall in the US is between 0.00004% and 0.0009%, according to a 2017 study by the Brennan Center for Justice.

A Washington Post review of the 2016 election found one proven case of postal voting fraud.

And a voter fraud database collated by Arizona State University between 2000 and 2012, found 491 cases of postal ballot fraud out of hundreds of millions of votes.

Oregon has held postal elections since 2000 and has only reported 14 fraudulent votes attempted by mail.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-wo...ter-fraud-myth:
"The president has continued to claim voter fraud was a problem in the 2016 election. A look at the facts makes clear fraud is rare, and does not happen on a scale even close to necessary to “rig” an election."

If Trump really thinks that there is fraud in mail-in voting then he should provide the evidence that this is happening and then work with the states to implement processes that would fix these issues. But he does not provide such evidence because that's not really his goal, is it? His goal is to stop people from voting which is his only path to re-election.

Back on subject, the interview with the Aussie was just another car-crash and complete humiliation by any objective standard like so many of his interviews that show that he is without a doubt the dumbest person on the planet ever to have put on a tie and jacket. And we don;t even have to go back that far. The Chris Wallace interview was a horror-show where he suggested that the Montreal Cognitive Assessment so difficult that Even Chris Wallace would not be able to pass it. He then follows it up and demonstrates his awesome powers that he can remember Man, Woman, TV, Camera and one other word that I can;t remember one month later. He basically grouped the words so he could repeat them on live TV. A third-grader would have realised that the words were not random.

And all this non-sense just repeats every day, every week, every month. Day in day out.

Does he talk out of his hat whenever he opens his mouth? I mean, is this even up for serious discussion?

Cheers.

[Wickerman]

But he does not provide such evidence because that's not really his goal, is it? His goal is to stop people from voting which is his only path to re-election.

Brits might not realize that in the southern states vast numbers of coloured voters live in the country and are not able to get to voting stations in the city. This is why Trump is trying to condemn mail-in votes, because those coloured voters generally vote Democrat.
Being the two-faced pumpkin that he is, Trump is listed to vote in Florida his home, so he does it by mail - go figure.

I would just love to see him lose this election, but I fear he is capable of pulling any stunt, legal or illegal, to make sure he wins.

[rjpalmer]

Oregon has held postal elections since 2000 and has only reported 14 fraudulent votes attempted by mail.

I can confirm what you are saying. I lived in Oregon for years and there's little or no voter fraud by mail; it's a bunch of b.s. peddled by Trump so he can attempt to negate the coming results and remain in power. That, and suppress the black vote.

These 14 cases in Oregon were mainly elderly people who maintained two addresses (one in another state) and voted in both states. It was down to stupidity, rather than corruption...and the mistakes were caught. There was no pattern, and the voters' party affiliations were across the board.

By contrast, there was a case of serious election fraud in Oregon back in 2013, but it was where the votes were being counted, and not a matter that had anything to do with the U.S. Post Office, which Trump's people are now trying to cripple.

A Republican election worker (yes, that's Trump's party) was caught filling in ballots that hadn't been entirely completed by the voters, turning them into votes for the Republican candidates. Another worker saw her doing it and turned her in.

She went to jail for 90 days. I don't think that Trump has yet reached the point that he would pardon the woman and invite her to speak at the RNC, but he's moving in that direction.

https://pamplinmedia.com/pt/9-news/1...-fraud-charges

[caz]

Brits might not realize that in the southern states vast numbers of coloured voters live in the country and are not able to get to voting stations in the city. This is why Trump is trying to condemn mail-in votes, because those coloured voters generally vote Democrat.
Being the two-faced pumpkin that he is, Trump is listed to vote in Florida his home, so he does it by mail - go figure.

I would just love to see him lose this election, but I fear he is capable of pulling any stunt, legal or illegal, to make sure he wins.

Hi Jon,

I'm a Brit and didn't realise this, but I'm not the least bit surprised.

What Trump is extremely accomplished at is to make Boris 'U-turn' Johnson and Dominic 'puppet master' Cummings look ever so slightly less ghastly by comparison.

It's a funny old world, isn't it? And I do mean 'old'.

Left to me, I'd only let the younger generation have a vote. I'd gladly sacrifice mine for their sake. They have more sense in their little fingers.

Love,

Caz
X

[Fisherman]

Left to me, I'd only let the younger generation have a vote. I'd gladly sacrifice mine for their sake. They have more sense in their little fingers.

Love,

Caz
X

That sounds completely preposterous. And - sadly - very true.

[Harry D]

because those coloured voters generally vote Democrat.

Turkeys voting for Christmas?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think that Trump is totally honest, a towering genius and the greatest statesman of our generation.

Oh and my sincerest congratulations to Pierre for solving the ripper case for us at last

[rjpalmer]

Hi Jon,

I'm a Brit and didn't realise this, but I'm not the least bit surprised.

From my experience, it's not really a matter of black folks living in rural areas being unable to vote, except by mail, though that might be an element.

It's precincts in very large U.S. cities, with a large black population, that have only a smattering of polling places. On election day you can see people lined up around the block like it was the opening night of Star Wars 2, which, of course, means that many give up and go home, or don't even bother to register.

Meanwhile, in my white suburban neighborhood, every third church is a polling place, and there's no line whatsoever.

It's called voter suppression, and its rampant in America. What is even more rampant is people not voting no matter what the difficulty might be.

[rjpalmer]

And I should mention that it's just not the black vote.

There was a city in Texas that put the designated voting place for the college district thirty miles out of town. Evidently hoping those rotten readers of books wouldn't vote.

[Wickerman]

While you're here, can you explain this Electoral College and their impact on the vote?
The simple explanation I've been told is that it doesn't matter how many public votes are cast (called the Popular vote), it is still the Electoral College that votes for a President.
Is this what they call Democracy?

[rjpalmer]

Hi Jon,

The electoral college is a strange system, and is only in play in the Presidential election. I don't think it was originally designed for skullduggery; the idea was that the rural areas of the country wouldn't be at the mercy of the big cities, with all their voters. It was meant to balance things out.

225 years or so later, and helped along with gerrymandering, population migration, etc., the pendulum has swung in the other direction, and now the national elections are basically decided by only 4 or 5 'swing states.'

Meanwhile, California with its millions of residents gets precisely two U.S. Senators, as does Wyoming, with its four ranchers, millions of acres of prairie, and several million head of cattle.

Personally, if I had my way, I'd sub-let the country to Finland or Sweden or someplace similar, and let them run it rationally. The system is broken, with no end in sight.

RP


PS. As more and more people gravitate to big cities and coastal areas, it will become even more extreme. If the U.S. survives another 100 years with the same system, which is doubtful, you'd see a situation were empty rural areas will wield enormous influence over the Senate and over national elections. Indeed, that's what we are already seeing.

[c.d.]

While you're here, can you explain this Electoral College and their impact on the vote?
The simple explanation I've been told is that it doesn't matter how many public votes are cast (called the Popular vote), it is still the Electoral College that votes for a President.
Is this what they call Democracy?

In fact, more people voted for Hillary Clinton than they did for Trump but Trump was elected President as a result of winning the Electoral College vote. Go figure.

c.d.

[Abby Normal]

While you're here, can you explain this Electoral College and their impact on the vote?
The simple explanation I've been told is that it doesn't matter how many public votes are cast (called the Popular vote), it is still the Electoral College that votes for a President.
Is this what they call Democracy?

would you want LA and NYC city deciding who the president is every year? lol

another example of the genius of our founding fathers.