2020 US Presidential Election

[aot]

 

[Christiaan]

True, but it also stops people from being brought on board because of her. He has talked about being a one term president. I would like it to be someone younger who could carry a torch, not someone who will also be 70 by the next election.

I heard that too. She has one of the lowest public profiles among the top contenders. One advantage is that she is considered to be popular among the California Progressive caucus (led by Ro Khanna). She has quite some progressive credentials (support Green New Deal, Child Welfare Reform, support universal healthcare, etc.). And when you start to think she would be the ideal candidate from a progressive point of view, you find this on the internet :

 

[Juan]

The UK is part of NATO, which works reasonably well as a unit due to the US on the whole, but the EU is far from united; it is fraying at the edges and will eventually collapse. Maybe NATO will too, now. The EU is only really good for the weaker economies within it and for Germany in the long run.

I will give you one thing though, the Brexit talks were badly handled by the UK, which was largely down to May's ineptness, weakness and love for the EU.

Anyway, this is a US elections thread, better get back on topic

As much as I don't like Trump, he is right about NATO, i.e. the other countries have not been pulling their weight or taking their own defence seriously, and they only have themselves to blame. But, you are right, it is a gift to Russia.

Should you be looking to Germany for leadership? It is reliant on Russia for one.

However, NATO is not an economic block.

 

[Christiaan]

View attachment 40038

These national polls are important (= popular vote & strengthen political legitimacy), but eventually it all comes down to polls that shows significant support at state level (= electoral college). At the time of Hillary Clinton vs. D. Trump, not a lot of republican or leaning states came into play for Democrats to win the electoral college. Key difference now is that Biden might even win red states like Texas, Ohio & Georgia. This is unprecedented and might change the electoral and political playing field for years to come (Senate and House of R.)

 

[Christiaan]

The UK is part of NATO, which works reasonably well as a unit due to the US on the whole, but the EU is far from united; it is fraying at the edges and will eventually collapse. Maybe NATO will too, now. The EU is only really good for the weaker economies within it and for Germany in the long run.

I will give you one thing though, the Brexit talks were badly handled by the UK, which was largely down to May's ineptness, weakness and love for the EU.

Anyway, this is a US elections thread, better get back on topic

As much as I don't like Trump, he is right about NATO, i.e. the other countries have not been pulling their weight or taking their own defence seriously, and they only have themselves to blame. But, you are right, it is a gift to Russia.

Should you be looking to Germany for leadership? It is reliant on Russia for one.

I don't think it's likely EU will fall apart in 10, 20 years. Even the most eurospectic countries like Poland and Hungary acknowledge the benefits of being an EU member from political, economical and scientific perspective. After the chaos with Brexit, most far right political parties with independence aspirations (e.g. Marine Le Pen with her Frexit and my Dutch compatriot Thierry Baudet with his Nexit) changed their minds and decided it is better to change the European Union from within than staying outside.

I agree about the financial contribution to NATO. That is not fair to the US. It is too low on our part. Most countries in the EU pay below the 2% minimum. Instead of blowing the whole issue up, we should negotiate with Trump or the next American administration about equally dividing defence in world matters and finance.

 

[all to gain]

I don't think it's likely EU will fall apart in 10, 20 years. Even the most eurospectic countries like Poland and Hungary acknowledge the benefits of being an EU member from political, economical and scientific perspective. After the chaos with Brexit, most far right political parties with independence aspirations (e.g. Marine Le Pen with her Frexit and my Dutch compatriot Thierry Baudet with his Nexit) changed their minds and decided it is better to change the European Union from within than staying outside.

I agree about the financial contribution to NATO. That is not fair to the US. It is too low on our part. Most countries in the EU pay below the 2% minimum. Instead of blowing the whole issue up, we should negotiate with Trump or the next American administration about equally dividing defence in world matters and finance.

Looking at 10-20 years is a very short-term view. That amount of time is nothing in reality, although for us tinnitus sufferers it seems like an eternity. The EU will implode for sure, it's just a matter of when.

The UK, or what is left of it, would be better turning itself to doing trade with the rest of the Anglosphere and other countries and not relying on trade with the EU.

 

[WillBeNimble]

At the time of Hillary Clinton vs. D. Trump, not a lot of republican or leaning states came into play for Democrats to win the electoral college. Key difference now is that Biden might even win red states like Texas, Ohio & Georgia. This is unprecedented and might change the electoral and political playing field for years to come (Senate and House of R.)

It's not going to change the playing field for years to come. It will affect this election and that's it. These new Dem voters aren't for the party, they're just anti trump.

 

[FGG]

It's not going to change the playing field for years to come. It will affect this election and that's it. These new Dem voters aren't for the party, they're just anti trump.

That's my prediction too. Many progressives will vote against Trump but then lose interest in the future if the dem party doesn't adopt a less neolib mindset. There needs to be less lip service and more actual compromise.

 

[FGG]

...

 

[aot]

...

 

[Christiaan]

It's not going to change the playing field for years to come. It will affect this election and that's it. These new Dem voters aren't for the party, they're just anti trump.

That's my prediction too. Many progressives will vote against Trump but then lose interest in the future if the dem party doesn't adopt a less neolib mindset. There needs to be less lip service and more actual compromise.

Ok, it sounds crazy what I'm going to say, but hear me out. It's going to be a looooong story.

I don't think that it has something to do with the Dems having a better strategy in winning people over, but it has more to do with the tainted brand of the GOP (as a party of good conservative, christian values) and the fight for the soul of the Republican Party (Trumpism vs. liberal conservatism).

I'm more than certain that there will be political infighting & chaos within the GOP for the next 2-4 years, maybe even more. It will be a fight for the soul of the party between the people who support Trumpism and the politicians of the old school liberal conservatism.

My guess is that even if Trump will lose the presidential elections, his political legacy will still be alive and well within the party. Trumpism can be seen as a cocktail of populist rhetoric, nationalism, protectionism, christian values and neoliberal economics and is considered by many politicians as a good electoral strategy that resonates well with conservatives, blue collar workers and a lot of christian folk. Thus, a broad electoral appeal. We already have seen that politicians like Matt Gaetz, Tim Cotton & Lauren Boebert are rebranding themselves in D. Trump's image and are trying to expand Trumpism in every way they can.

However, there is a political current in and outside the GOP that tries to return to the liberal-conservative roots of the party. For most of those people, liberal conservatism embodies the real GOP, a party of decency, christian values for moral order, pro free market without protectionist restraints, but not as nationalistic diplomatically (no unilateral decision making & national interest emphasized= no America First), not per se antagonistic to scientific facts (global warming), loyal to the constitution & rule of law (attorney general is not the president's lawyer). Mitt Romney, Colin Powell & Cindy McCain are those who are supporters of this ideology.

From what I've read and understand, the people who support Liberal-conservatism (LCs) belief that Trumpism will alienate independent voters, moderate republicans and white suburban voters from the Republican party because of current GOP's abuse of power (involvement AG in Trump cases FBI), their aggressive nationalistic rhetoric, cronyism (assigning Jared Kushner for top functions within government), GOP politicians sugarcoating Trump's gaffes, and the controversial America first policy (loss of credibility in international diplomacy due to Paris Climate Agreement, NAFTA, NATO, China, North Korea, etc.). For LCs, it seems that GOP image has been tainted in such a negative way by Trumpism that the party will lose support from crucial voter blocs in the next senate and house elections.

For that reason, the LC's have set up organisation like the Lincoln Project in a bid to contest Trumpian politicians in primaries. They even openly support moderate republicans, independents or even centrist democrats if that helps remove Trumpism in their party.

I don't think the Trumpian politicians like Matt Gaetz will give room to the LC's, as we have seen in recent news about his role in removing conference chair Liz Cheney (link: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-republicans-liz-cheney-matt-gaetz-thomas-massie-conference-chair/). So my guess is it will come down to an internal struggle between the Trumpian politicians and the LCs. They will be more concerned with their political adversaries within the party than with the Democratic Party & it will create a lot of fuss in the media. This will be beneficial to the Democratic Party if they manage to find a balance between centrism and progressivism.

 

[Christiaan]

White House deliberately dropped plan to conduct nationwide corona testing early on

The White House COVID-19 task force has deliberately thwarted a plan for early nationwide testing because it was the Democratic-led states that have been hardest hit by the pandemic, according to a comprehensive reconstruction of Vanity Fair. The task force was led by Donald Trump's son-in-law and consultant Jared Kushner.

Link: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/202...s-secret-testing-plan-went-poof-into-thin-air

 

[FGG]

White House deliberately dropped plan to conduct nationwide corona testing early on

The White House COVID-19 task force has deliberately thwarted a plan for early nationwide testing because it was the Democratic-led states that have been hardest hit by the pandemic, according to a comprehensive reconstruction of Vanity Fair. The task force was led by Donald Trump's son-in-law and consultant Jared Kushner.

Link: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/202...s-secret-testing-plan-went-poof-into-thin-air

This is literally a form of bioterrorism. Wtf.

 

[Christiaan]

This is literally a form of bioterrorism. Wtf.

History will not judge the Trump family kindly, if this is true.

 

[FGG]

History will not judge the Trump family kindly, if this is true.

This is a totally hypothetical question of course (thankfully it looks like Trump doesn't have the power to do this) but if Trump delayed the election to keep himself in power, would any foreign governments step in or would we Americans be on our own to deal with it?

 

[WillBeNimble]

This is a totally hypothetical question of course (thankfully it looks like Trump doesn't have the power to do this) but if Trump delayed the election to keep himself in power, would any foreign governments step in or would we Americans be on our own to deal with it?

I suspect we would be on our own to deal with it, unless our own military told him to stand down.

 

[all to gain]

This is a totally hypothetical question of course (thankfully it looks like Trump doesn't have the power to do this) but if Trump delayed the election to keep himself in power, would any foreign governments step in or would we Americans be on our own to deal with it?

What could other governments do? I think you'd be alone to deal with it outside of some wagging fingers from the British and so on. Would a civil war break out?

Let's hope Trump gets slaughtered come election day. If he gets back in the US is all but dead to me.

Serious changes need to be made to the electoral system to make sure the likes of Trump (no political background) can ever get into power again.

 

[FGG]

What could other governments do? I think you'd be alone to deal with it outside of some wagging fingers from the British and so on. Would a civil war break out?

Let's hope Trump gets slaughtered come election day. If he gets back in the US is all but dead to me.

Serious changes need to be made to the electoral system to make sure the likes of Trump (no political background) can ever get into power again.

I honestly think a civil war would break out. Unless the military stepped in to remove him because by law his term ends Jan 1st whether an election is held or not.

 

[Tanni]

This is a totally hypothetical question of course (thankfully it looks like Trump doesn't have the power to do this) but if Trump delayed the election to keep himself in power, would any foreign governments step in or would we Americans be on our own to deal with it?

You would absolutely be on your own, I'm afraid. Nobody would dare to take on America.

Although would you really be that comforted spotting Boris coming up on the horizon?

I don't *think* it will happen... I mean, he'll definitely try to, but you have quite a robust system in place to guard against dictatorship -- the whole eight year rule was created for this very reason I believe.

I think he'll find a way to rig the election to 'legally' remain for the full eight years though *cough George W Bush cough*

 

[just1morething]

White House deliberately dropped plan to conduct nationwide corona testing early on

The White House COVID-19 task force has deliberately thwarted a plan for early nationwide testing because it was the Democratic-led states that have been hardest hit by the pandemic, according to a comprehensive reconstruction of Vanity Fair. The task force was led by Donald Trump's son-in-law and consultant Jared Kushner.

Link: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/202...s-secret-testing-plan-went-poof-into-thin-air

I'm not quite sure why you are so interested in U.S. politics when you are not a citizen here?

 

[FGG]

I'm not quite sure why you are so interested in U.S. politics when you are not a citizen here?

I'm not a dog or a cat but I spent my education and career learning about their anatomy and physiology. Some people are just interested in things.

 

[just1morething]

I'm not a dog or a cat but I spent my education and career learning about their anatomy and physiology. Some people are just interested in things.

It was more directed at @Christiaan, not you.

 

[all to gain]

I'm not quite sure why you are so interested in U.S. politics when you are not a citizen here?

Because the US, whether we like or not, involves itself in every other country in the world. Hence what happens in the US on the national political level has a large influence on what happens elsewhere.

 

[WillBeNimble]

It was more directed at @Christiaan, not you.

And I believe she was offering a reason. Why does it matter if a Dutch person is interested in US politics to you? Considering how powerful our military is, and that we're supposedly a force for "good" and "stability" in the world, I would say most people should at least be somewhat interested in our politics.

 

[just1morething]

And I believe she was offering a reason. Why does it matter if a Dutch person is interested in US politics to you? Considering how powerful our military is, and that we're supposedly a force for "good" and "stability" in the world, I would say most people should at least be somewhat interested in our politics.

Seems like everyone is bashing Trump, even people from across the pond. Some people I read stopped watching Jimmy Kimmel because his monologue was always about Trump. Jimmy took a break now, possibly from the flak he was getting or maybe he is always on a break during the summer?

Our president was trying to get our allies to pay their fair share in defense spending, that's a good thing for the American people isn't it? Our budget deficit is ridiculous. Getting tariff money in the billions from China is also fair. Our trade deficit is also ridiculous. That money helps out the American farmer during this period of low grain prices. I just think this thread is mostly one sided is all.

 

[Christiaan]

I'm not quite sure why you are so interested in U.S. politics when you are not a citizen here?

Well, I see that your question created some attention in the thread It's always good to have these stirring conversations on Tinnitus Talk.

Well, here's my take: I just happen to be interested in American politics, and by extension American culture. Ever since I was young, I loved to follow American football, basketball and baseball. I even played a bit of baseball a couple of years ago for a team called VUC Den Haag (you pronounce it as F*ck Den Haag. Oh boy, how the opponents took joy in misusing that term)

Anyway, American politics. I was around 10 years old when I discovered that politics had and has and tremendous impact in our daily life. And it won't take too much time to find out that America played a major part in global affairs. So it makes it useful to know a bit or two about the US. Also, I love to research political theories, strategies and dynamics. My interest is mostly focused on comparative analyses between countries, so my focus is not only on the US

It's a bit of a hobby of mine and ATM I am researching why right wing populism has taken root in Europe and America around the same time and now determine the political field in the West. E.g. Thomas Frank is one of those great scholars from your country who has made it very clear for me that there are certain patterns at play in both our countries in the rise of right wing populism, like the embrace of neoliberalism by (moderate) left wing parties, the targeting of upper and middle class at the expanse of the lower class (seen as backward by liberal elite), the liberal elite that embraced meritocracy (while social and environmental factors also played a part in individual success), right wing parties that embraced blue collar workers by using the Great Backlash strategy (support. for right wing pro corporate economic message in exchange for cultural issues, like busing, migration, gun policy and christian influence in schools, etc. )

If people here are interested in the role of populism (and why the GOP and Trump profited from the power vacuum left by the Dems), here's a link to a review of Thomas Frank's newest book ''The people, no'':
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/kansas-should-go-f-itself

 

[WillBeNimble]

Seems like everyone is bashing Trump, even people from across the pond. Some people I read stopped watching Jimmy Kimmel because his monologue was always about Trump. Jimmy took a break now, possibly from the flak he was getting or maybe he is always on a break during the summer?

Our president was trying to get our allies to pay their fair share in defense spending, that's a good thing for the American people isn't it? Our budget deficit is ridiculous. Getting tariff money in the billions from China is also fair. Our trade deficit is also ridiculous. That money helps out the American farmer during this period of low grain prices. I just think this thread is mostly one sided is all.

Telling the European Nation's they need to put more money into NATO does make sense to me. It was how he did it that's caused issues though.

Our budget deficit isn't because they're not pulling their fair share, but because we never pulled back military spending after the cold war. Granted, it's hard to do that when the military is such a huge portion of both the economy and jobs training.

The tariff on China was a disaster, and hurt American farmers more than helped. We had to bail quiet a few of them out after China stopped buying our soybeans. tariffs don't exist in a vacuum, and China wasn't a smaller country Trump could bully into capitulation, as he has always done in the business world.

Trump exacerbated both these problems by thinking he could just bully these foreign powers into doing what he wanted.

However, most criticism has been about the pandemic as of late, and his response. Which, has also been pretty bad.

Hard to really just give the guy the benefit of the doubt when the results of his actions have overall not been good to the American people themselves, or the nation's credibility. That's the beauty of democracies though, you, Christian, and I can all disagree or agree on different points but still share our opinions.

 

[Christiaan]

Seems like everyone is bashing Trump, even people from across the pond. Some people I read stopped watching Jimmy Kimmel because his monologue was always about Trump. Jimmy took a break now, possibly from the flak he was getting or maybe he is always on a break during the summer?

Our president was trying to get our allies to pay their fair share in defense spending, that's a good thing for the American people isn't it? Our budget deficit is ridiculous. Getting tariff money in the billions from China is also fair. Our trade deficit is also ridiculous. That money helps out the American farmer during this period of low grain prices. I just think this thread is mostly one sided is all.

I agree for the fair share part concerning NATO. Some countries are paying under the 2% of GNP limit and there is a formal agreement that all countries should attain that goal in 2024. What I don't understand is that Trump keeps expanding the military spending budget (from 611 billion in 2016 to 738 billion in 2020). That wouldn't help keeping the budget in order.

I would also agree with protectionism of certain sectors, if there's a future. Protection of the farming sector could be beneficial & Trump's action on negotiation metal tariffs with Asia (specifically China) gave the US metal sector a boost (less import, higher prices + productivity).

On the other hand, the rest of the world has agreed to contribute to the Paris Climate Agreement while the US has decided to go their own way. I think that protecting and investing in the coal industry is not worthwhile in the long run: costs a lot to fix side effects pollution (not to mention the dire effects of global warming) + other countries in the EU and East Asia would have a more efficient energy system in the near future (= better competitive position). Investing in fossil fuel industrial is a cheap shot to score points in a short presidential cycle, but long term it has serious consequences. If we have a Day after Tomorrow situation halfway or at the end of this century, you won't have any use of the farming and metal industry.

 

[just1morething]

The tariff on China was a disaster, and hurt American farmers more than helped

Most corn & soybean farmers got about $70/acre payment from the USDA last year I was told. Almost everything is made in China. I just received an adjustable bed lift and that god darned thing is made in China. I thought China had tariffs on our agriculture products they import from us, but I may be wrong. Anyway our trade balance is way out of whack with China.

Changing horses mid-stream during a pandemic doesn't sound like a good idea to me. And Joe Biden will be 78 if he is elected president. The stock market has also came back a lot. Most people are interested in how their investments, IRA's etc. are doing. The cruise lines and airlines are obviously having a tough time, but should turn around if we get a vaccine. Trump does not have the most tact, but coming from a business background that could be expected. Sir Richard Branson predicted that. He is a friend of Obama.

 

[all to gain]

I agree for the fair share part concerning NATO. Some countries are paying under the 2% of GNP limit and there is a formal agreement that all countries should attain that goal in 2024. What I don't understand is that Trump keeps expanding the military spending budget (from 611 billion in 2016 to 738 billion in 2020). That wouldn't help keeping the budget in order.

He/America need to keep up with China and Russia. These countries are far ahead in some areas, eg hypersonic weapons, glide vehicles, space warfare and so on. But these countries can do things much cheaper than the US due to low wages and lower safety standards.

Of course he may just be throwing money at the problem rather than seeing where money can be saved or spent more wisely.

On the other hand, the rest of the world has agreed to contribute to the Paris Climate Agreement while the US has decided to go their own way.

This is all very well if you believe that other countries will keep to the Agreement. But they won't, eg especially the big players like China and Russia and maybe India.

Trump had some decent ideas, but his way of doing things and his own arrogance means he is easily 'played' by other world leaders, eg those of (again) China and Russia.