Romney on Pardoning Trump

[Dr Exiled]

1. Talk to Stacy Abrams about this invented requirement to concede. Also, Hillary Clinton conceded then spent the next 4 years falsely claiming Russia made her lose.

Keep working on your false equivalences. One state-level Democrat does not concede and you think this excuses Trump. Abrams did concede in ‘22. Clinton conceded, whatever else you have to say. Meh. Next.

2. There is more to it than just conspiracy theories. There were some irregularities in the election. Normally the counting doesn't stop like it did. There were a lot more mail-in ballots in 2020 than in prior elections and mail-in ballots are more susceptible to being manipulated. Even so, he lost all the challenges. However, it isn't criminal to contest elections.

There are always irregularities. The question is whether they rise to the level of game-changing. These did not. Most people who were informed, even among Trump’s people, knew they were not. Next.

3. This goes to the victim mentality that pervades our country. The Vice President is a big boy and declined to follow what Trump said. You are equating your TDS with reality.

I would call it a prudence mentality. Don’t elect people who crap on democracy if you want one. Next.

4. Look at the Hawaii case from 1960 regarding alternative electors. In that case, there was a dispute and Hawaii ended up sending three different sets of electors to be counted in the electoral college. Originally Nixon won, then after a challenge, Kennedy won. Separate Nixon electors, Kennedy electors and then electors certified by the Hawaii governor were sent to the electoral college. There is precedent for it. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CRE ... 6609-2.htm; see also, Bush v. Gore, a wrongly decided case that prematurely stopped the counting in Florida. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/531/98/

So, the fact that Trump produced fake electors, and he fomented an assault on the Capitol means nothing to you, since you refuse to see these things as part of the same scheme.

Gore should have won and should have continued to fight but didn't. Further, Kerry should have fought harder regarding Ohio. There was a lot of mischief in that election and Kerry had good cause to dispute it. But, yes they weren't Trump, the dictator, right? Even though he left office and didn't remain forever, we are supposed to believe the current nonsense about him now.

So, conceding a loss is, in your view, the sucker’s play. Trump tried to stay in office, and, given a chance, he will stay in office until he dies next time around. Believe people when they tell you who they are. Trump has told us in a myriad of ways, but you are not listening. You have some obtuse idea of being edgy to look like the wisest guy in the room. From my vantage point, you look like an idiot on this topic.

5. Trump wasn't behind the hooligans that rioted on J6. Recall that Trump, with all of the indictments, was not indicted for insurrection curiously. (they can't prove it).

Ha!!! Yeah, right. He just refused to stop it once it was underway. Boy, what foolishness.

As for engaging with you further, whatever.

Indeed. The feeling is perfectly mutual. Anyone who makes excuses for the repugnant charlatan is not worth my time. TDS my ass. Stupid Trump-defending useful idiots is more like it.

Maybe you're overreacting just a bit? Just a suggestion. Maybe take a look at what Shades said earlier. A Trump presidency would be like the prior one where he tries to change laws/programs just enough to put his name in lights. He isn't the monster you make him out to be. Mine is an argument of degree. I won't vote for him, but, this TDS takes us away from the real issues that the uniparty doesn't want us to push.

Additionally, prosecutors like to over-charge, especially when it is a politically charged case like this one. Sadly, they had you at the indictment stage/media hype. There is more to it than just charging someone and then trying the case in the billionaire controlled media. Further, you may be surprised that, and I have said this before, I will be voting for Kennedy, not Trump. I think you and your compatriots here misconstrue standing in front of a lynch-mob as supporting the man's candidacy or supporting the man. He isn't guilty of what is being claimed. He is probably guilty of other things but not what is currently being claimed. That's all. My position has always been that the Democrats overreacted to his presidency and put us through the unsupported Russiagate nonsense. Then they brought a bunch of nonsense lawsuits against the man that have only made him more popular, made him into a martyr, practically assuring his election. They're making Clinton's mistakes all over again.

[Gunnar]

I don't think Dr. Exiled is a poorly informed person. I think he is smart, educated, and well informed.

in my opinion he is also enmeshed in conspiratorial thinking. Once down that rabbit hole, it is very difficult to back oneself out into sound reasoning. Especially for smart people.

I think I understand what you are saying here. I think it is another example of someone who would rather risk remaining a dupe than suffer the embarrassment of having to admit to having been one, regardless of what is actually supported by the evidence. I have tried very hard to watch out for and correct that tendency in myself. I think and hope that overall, I have largely succeeded in that, especially since I first began to realize that the religion into which I was born and raised could not the divinely revealed truth it claimed to be. Oh, how I resisted coming to that uncomfortable realization at first! I think I have demonstrated in my posting history on this forum that I am amenable to changing my opinion when presented with clear evidence that warrants doing so.

[Res Ipsa]

I don't think Dr. Exiled is a poorly informed person. I think he is smart, educated, and well informed.

in my opinion he is also enmeshed in conspiratorial thinking. Once down that rabbit hole, it is very difficult to back oneself out into sound reasoning. Especially for smart people.

I think I understand what you are saying here. I think it is another example of someone who would rather risk remaining a dupe than suffer the embarrassment of having to admit to having been one, regardless of what is actually supported by the evidence. I have tried very hard to watch out for and correct that tendency in myself. I think and hope that overall, I have largely succeeded in that, especially since I first began to realize that the religion into which I was born and raised was not the divinely revealed truth it claimed to be. Oh, how I resisted coming to that uncomfortable realization at first! I think I have demonstrated in my posting history on this forum that I am amenable to changing my opinion when presented with clear evidence that warrants doing so.

No, not at all. I don't think he's a dupe. I think he 100% believes what he says. I don't think fear of being wrong even comes into play.

[Vēritās]

1. Talk to Stacy Abrams about this invented requirement to concede. Also, Hillary Clinton conceded then spent the next 4 years falsely claiming Russia made her lose.

It is a fact that Russia helped Trump get elected. This isn't even debatable. It is also a fact that the Comey letter likely threw the election. I remember polls at the time said just 3 weeks before the election, 20% of likely voters said they were undecided. Then a week later the Comey letter is released and Hillary loses by a very slim margin of something like 80,000 votes over a half dozen swing states.

Nothing wrong with her bringing up the fact that she was America's choice, and Trump needed a lot of help to beat her. Of course this is never going to sway any of the minds that have been conditioned through decades of conservative talk radio to hate the Clintons.

[Gunnar]

No, not at all. I don't think he's a dupe. I think he 100% believes what he says. I don't think fear of being wrong even comes into play.

I'm not sure I entirely agree with you on that. I must say, though, it is at least somewhat encouraging that he knows better than to vote for Trump, though he grossly underestimates how much of a real danger he is to our democracy, in my opinion. Trump has openly and unabashedly declared that he aspires to be an authoritarian dictator and claimed the right to have his political opponents assassinated, that he intends to pursue a course of relentless vindication against his perceived opponents and detractors and appoint or nominate only personnel willing to swear absolute loyalty to himself alone.

I am also dismayed that Dr Exiled prefers to support an ill-informed, anti-science and anti-vaxxer like Kennedy over President Biden. Biden may not be the most ideal possible candidate, but, so far, I am convinced that of the currently running President candidates, he is the likeliest to govern honestly and at least somewhat competently. It is a cold hard fact that our country is doing better economy wise than at any time during Trump's Presidency, all things considered.

[Kishkumen]

I don't think Dr. Exiled is a poorly informed person. I think he is smart, educated, and well informed.

in my opinion he is also enmeshed in conspiratorial thinking. Once down that rabbit hole, it is very difficult to back oneself out into sound reasoning. Especially for smart people.

Yes, and buying into bad information and conspiratorial thinking is “poorly informed.” It certainly isn’t “well informed.”

[Res Ipsa]

I don't think Dr. Exiled is a poorly informed person. I think he is smart, educated, and well informed.

in my opinion he is also enmeshed in conspiratorial thinking. Once down that rabbit hole, it is very difficult to back oneself out into sound reasoning. Especially for smart people.

Yes, and buying into bad information and conspiratorial thinking is “poorly informed.” It certainly isn’t “well informed.”

Point taken.

[Kishkumen]

Maybe you're overreacting just a bit? Just a suggestion. Maybe take a look at what Shades said earlier. A Trump presidency would be like the prior one where he tries to change laws/programs just enough to put his name in lights. He isn't the monster you make him out to be. Mine is an argument of degree. I won't vote for him, but, this TDS takes us away from the real issues that the uniparty doesn't want us to push.

Additionally, prosecutors like to over-charge, especially when it is a politically charged case like this one. Sadly, they had you at the indictment stage/media hype. There is more to it than just charging someone and then trying the case in the billionaire controlled media. Further, you may be surprised that, and I have said this before, I will be voting for Kennedy, not Trump. I think you and your compatriots here misconstrue standing in front of a lynch-mob as supporting the man's candidacy or supporting the man. He isn't guilty of what is being claimed. He is probably guilty of other things but not what is currently being claimed. That's all. My position has always been that the Democrats overreacted to his presidency and put us through the unsupported Russiagate nonsense. Then they brought a bunch of nonsense lawsuits against the man that have only made him more popular, made him into a martyr, practically assuring his election. They're making Clinton's mistakes all over again.

No, I don’t think I am overreacting at all. I love Shades, but I have rarely agreed with his overall political judgment. Trump II is the one without guardrails where he is surrounded by kooks, psychopaths, and useful idiots. Any prudent calculation would advise preventing a Trump presidency if only to keep out the unscrupulous individuals who plan to exploit it. Your choice, to vote third party at the most critical time, is foolish. Trump is on trial because he committed crimes. That’s how the system is supposed to work. Maybe you think powerful people should be above the law?

Clinton’s mistake was running for president in the first place. Had she been a better politician, Trump would have lost regardless of Russian help and Comey’s. It was arrogant to run one of the most divisive figures in American politics of the last 30 years, but she and Bill always were somewhat arrogant. Hillary was not the completely unqualified candidate Trump was and is. He lacks the knowledge, character, intelligence, and temperament to be president.

So, given the choice of voting third party, Hillary, or Trump, I voted Hillary. I will vote for Biden over Trump. There is a reason that a sizable portion of Republicans have fought against Trump or refused to vote for him in the primaries: he is a threat to democracy. If Republicans with principles and good judgment can see it, then that really says something. I don’t understand why you are oblivious to the threat, but you are.

I am not a registered member of a political party.

[ajax18]

I will be voting for Kennedy, not Trump.

Mr. Bet-David pointed out on Tucker Carlson that Kennedy's third party run will likely hurt Trump worse than Biden. From a rational perspective, I would think the voter would be more concerned with the economic results of Bidenomics versus Trump policy than any of this lawfare. I've met quite a few working black people who will be voting Republican for the first time. They said their family couldn't understand. I said you're voting as a working man. It changes your perspective, he agreed.

[Res Ipsa]

I will be voting for Kennedy, not Trump.

Mr. Bet-David pointed out on Tucker Carlson that Kennedy's third party run will likely hurt Trump worse than Biden. From a rational perspective, I would think the voter would be more concerned with the economic results of Bidenomics versus Trump policy than any of this lawfare. I've met quite a few working black people who will be voting Republican for the first time. They said their family couldn't understand. I said you're voting as a working man. It changes your perspective, he agreed.

Read some actual statistics on the economy.